[quote]Originally posted by shadow boxer:
[b]Tyvar mate... I know what you mean. In general the 'shooting community' is good, but somewhere, there's soemthing distinctly 'off' in the fridge.
America's collective psyche has some sort of unhealthy obsession with guns.
and yeah... like I said in other posts...
raze Hollywood,
Nuke Rupert Murdoch, CNN, PBL... etc etc etc...
TV and radio are heroin for eyes and ears.[/b][/quote]
See thats just IT alot of what your seeing of that "radical fringe" is created by a media thats hostile to gun ownership in general. You have to realize the actual rate of gun ownership is probably about 30% of the population, which means the ther 70% by and large have no clue. You have 78 million gun owners, versus what 180 some odd milliion non gun owners. Whats really going on is an obsession with violence, and guns are just the most effective tool for that violence.
And that isnt american SB, that obsession with violence has been getting worse since about 1900, it is the fundamental underpining of all the isms of the last century and today.. hate and violence, behind communism,"fascisim (which is nothing more then militant socialisim, to many people forget the fascists had planned centralized economies) REACTIONARY Islamisim (its not radical people, what the hell are you thinking, its a return to religious conservatism, Jerry Falwell is a basicly a non violent Bin Laden)
Anyways, there is nothing wrong with being a "gun nut" as in having a avid interest in firearms and their functioning, design, creation, or such, much like there is nothing wrong with being a "car nut" what the proble is, is with the amount of hate and desire to kill people.
Part of it is the damn jaded cynical whimpy media which puts out all this crap, says its "cool" then refuses to deal with the consequences.
Another part Im not sure of, Maybe at some point raw evil just got turned loose, I dont know how to explain it.
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 11-19-2002).]
[quote]Originally posted by Tyvar:
[b]Another part Im not sure of, Maybe at some point raw evil just got turned loose, I dont know how to explain it.[/b][/quote]
The Christians might point to Revelation and say that Satan has been cast down to Earth, and that we are in the Tribulation... [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[quote]Originally posted by rhett:
[b]One of my favorite quotes, "Guns are no more responsible for killing people than the spoon is for making Oprah fat."[/b][/quote]
Oh please....
You can't kill people with spoons. With guns you can. And not only that, but what is important here is, that it is [b]extremely easy[/b] to kill with guns and if guns are [b]easily available[/b] then killing is [b]easy too[/b]. That's the point.
In a way guns [b]are[/b] "responsible", because they are there "at hand", "within reach", because they are everywhere and available and accepted and an easy choice, which might even encourage to kill as opposed to having to do it with a knife for example, which takes much more to kill.
If the killer would have no gun killing would most definitely be [b]much harder[/b] don't you think? Sure you can kill with a car, or a knife, or even with a lamp, but those are not made primarily and solely for killing and it's much harder to kill using those things. There's no need to be available unnecessarily even more equipment, which you can use to kill and which makes it all that much easier. Killing should be made as hard as possible, don't you agree?
There are plenty enough other ways to defend yourself and avoid to be attacked. A civilized society would encourage and develope those other means instead of "giving weapons for everyone".
Now if there's no other way than use a gun to defend you in a society, then there's something horribly wrong in that society. I definitely wouldn't want to live in that kind of a society myself. No way.
"Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
No thanks! [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/icons/icon13.gif[/img]
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b] "Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
- PJH[/b][/quote]
Why was a PERSON threatening you? The problem in that situation wasn't the gun, it's the person doing the threatening.
I'd also point out that most crimes committed with a gun are premeditated crimes to some degree, crimes of passion where an 'easily available' gun comes into play happen far less frequently.
Once again disarming the law abiding good public does nothing because the criminals will have their guns anyway.
No one is forcing a gun into your hands, just don't try and take mine from me.
[quote]Originally posted by Konrad:
[b]Once again disarming the law abiding good public does nothing because the criminals will have their guns anyway.
No one is forcing a gun into your hands, just don't try and take mine from me.[/b][/quote]
You said it! [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b] Oh please....
Now if there's no other way than use a gun to defend you in a society, then there's something horribly wrong in that society. I definitely wouldn't want to live in that kind of a society myself. No way.
"Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
- PJH[/b][/quote]
Uh man, this is kinda Ironic since Finland has a rate of private possesion of firearms second only to the United States, with figures ranging from 25 to as many as 50% (acording to a UN report) of households (I believe the 25% figure myself) And I know Finland is planning on implementing a national registration system, but has it actualy been set up yet? or is it still all at local level?
Sorry PJH the fact that you guys in Finland have alot of guns floating around, and your homicide rate is still on par with that of Europe (especialy with the recent trends in most of Europe) goes to show that there is something else wrong then guns.
[quote]Originally posted by Konrad:
[b] Why was a PERSON threatening you? The problem in that situation wasn't the gun, it's the person doing the threatening.[/b][/quote]
If the person who's threatening you does not have a gun then you wouldn't need a gun to defend yourself. Now if the threatening person does have a gun, then he is threatning you [b]with a gun[/b]. Then the problem [b]is[/b] the gun in the situation. Person can threaten you even without having a gun, but then it's far less dangerous.
Of course the problem ultimately is in the person who's doing it (then again isn't the problem ultimately in the society and parents who raise children!?), but what makes it possible to the criminal to threaten you is [b]the gun[/b]. Criminals can't threat you and do crimes without the means/equipment to do that.
[quote]I'd also point out that most crimes committed with a gun are premeditated crimes to some degree, crimes of passion where an 'easily available' gun comes into play happen far less frequently.[/quote]
Eh? It doesn't matter if the crime is premeditated or not. The same easily available gun comes to play in every single crime done with a gun. The harder it is to get a gun for your crime, the better is the change you don't get it and kill, or wound someone with it.
Criminals can get their guns legally, or [b]steal it from someone who has bought it legally[/b], or illegally, but illegal guns aren't available just like that to everyone as you may believe. You have to know the right people and have the right connections. I wouldn't know myself where to get a gun if I needed one for a crime and I couldn't get it legally either, because of our laws. I'd have to belong to some sports club, or have some other very good reason to get it and I should also prove it to the authorities before they give me a license. Plus they would check my background.
That's what makes having guns so easily available legally a problem. People are what they are and making guns as hard to get as possible is everyones benefit.
[quote]Once again disarming the law abiding good public does nothing because the criminals will have their guns anyway.[/quote]
The law abiding public? Just what the heck does that mean anyway? No one is criminal when they're born. People [b]become[/b] criminals and if they have a legally bought gun at home then it's easy and simple to use it in a crime. If they didn't have that gun at home, then there's a good change they don't get it at all making them far less dangerous. Every people belongs to law abiding public until they start doing crimes. Except those how are already done crimes and been caught. New criminals "are born" all the time.
[quote]No one is forcing a gun into your hands, just don't try and take mine from me.[/B][/quote]
I'm not, I'm trying to talk some common sense to you, so that you would give up your gun of your own will. Now if you need a gun for hunting, or sport that's a different matter.
And Tyvar.... the percentage of people who own one or more guns in here is nowhere near the percentage of the USA. And even if it was, we don't have guns for self defence against criminals. Nearly all of the guns in here are for hunting, because hunting is so popular due to our country's nature. The other reason is sports. No one here generally buys a gun for self defense. Only VERY VERY few aqcuires a gun for self defense and those are always people who are being threatened by criminals, because they are personally connected to them somehow.
Uhmm Dude, if 25% of housholds there have guns thats not to far away from our 40%, and if the UN was right with the 50% number, you might even surpass us.
I bet the type of guns most commonly found in Finland match those here, there are more standard bolt action rifles and various makes of shotguns then there are handguns. Most people here buy weapons for hunting, and sporting purposes.
You tell me that spoons dont kill people. It is a metaphor for the food. Tell the millions of obese people who will die from heart attacks and other eating related diseases that food can't kill. Anyways, if I want to kill someone, I can just get a knife. So should we ban all knives? Killing is going to be easy no matter what. It is easy to snap someones neck if you know how. Garoteting someone takes no skill. Guns are easily availible because that is our constitutional right. And damn you all if you start trying to take away my constitutional rights.
As I mentioned above, it is not any harder to kill someone with a knife or baseball bat. Anything can kill people. If someone wants to kill, there is nothing stopping them (save killing them first, or disabling them). There is no way to make killing harder.What other ways are there to defend yourself? How easy is it to defend yourself against someone with a gun than unless you have a gun.
"Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
It's better than dying yourself...
If you die from a gun or knife, there is no difference. You are still just as dead. No, the gun does not allow someone to threaten you. In high school (or anywhere, for that matter), if a huge ass guy walks up to you and threatens you, it is still as scary and intimidating as a gun.
"Criminals can't threat you and do crimes without the means/equipment to do that."
So should we cut off everyones arms, so that you cant be robbed by someone (or get punched, or snap your neck).
You will never get me to lose my own guns with this logic.
[quote]Originally posted by Tyvar:
[b]
Uhmm Dude, if 25% of housholds there have guns thats not to far away from our 40%, and if the UN was right with the 50% number, you might even surpass us.[/b][/quote]
25% is not much different than 40%??? It's [b]A HUGE[/b] difference!
[quote][b] I bet the type of guns most commonly found in Finland match those here, there are more standard bolt action rifles and various makes of shotguns then there are handguns. Most people here buy weapons for hunting, and sporting purposes.[/b][/quote]
Well, if so that's good, but how many people are buying guns solely for self defence purpose?
[quote]Originally posted by rhett:
[b]You tell me that spoons dont kill people. It is a metaphor for the food. Tell the millions of obese people who will die from heart attacks and other eating related diseases that food can't kill.[/b][/quote]
That's a different matter entirely. You see, you can't use those things to kill people. If people kill themselves with food, or whatever it's their own fault.
[quote][b] Anyways, if I want to kill someone, I can just get a knife. So should we ban all knives?[/b][/quote]
No, because knives have a different primary purpose of use. They are not made for killing, guns are.
Besides, killing with a knife is nowhere near as easy as with a gun. It takes a whole lot more both mentally and physically to kill with a knife and it gives the victim much better change to defend himself/herself than against a gun. And a change of people getting only wounded instead of getting killed when using knives is much better as opposed to using guns.
[quote][b]Killing is going to be easy no matter what. It is easy to snap someones neck if you know how. Garoteting someone takes no skill.[/b][/quote]
Killing is never easy. Snapping a neck? It's not that simple thing to do even if you knew how. First you got to get into that position against your opponent and then do it. Definitely not easy. Besides that's a different matter also, because you can't ban hands. That was a bad example.
Garoteting? I don't know what that means, so no comment on that.
Besides if killing was easy anyway, that's no excuse to not fight against it and try to make it harder.
[quote][b]Guns are easily availible because that is our constitutional right. And damn you all if you start trying to take away my constitutional rights.[/b][/quote]
That constitutional right is useless and outdated.
[quote][b]As I mentioned above, it is not any harder to kill someone with a knife or baseball bat. Anything can kill people.[/b][/quote]
It is much harder indeed.
[quote][b]If someone wants to kill, there is nothing stopping them (save killing them first, or disabling them).[/b][/quote]
Excuses.
Again, is that a reason not to try preventing people from killing each other any way you can?
Then why don't you give everybody a constitutional right to kill anyone you want if there's no way of stopping people to kill? Makes as much sense as what you're saying.
[quote][b]There is no way to make killing harder.What other ways are there to defend yourself?[/b][/quote]
What other ways? You really don't know any other way of defending yourlself than shooting with a gun? Please....
[quote][b]How easy is it to defend yourself against someone with a gun than unless you have a gun.[/b][/quote]
EXACTLY!
[quote][b]It's better than dying yourself...[/b][/quote]
But everyone who threatens you are not using a gun and everyone who threatens you with a gun are not going to kill you, or shoot at all.
[quote][b]If you die from a gun or knife, there is no difference. You are still just as dead.[/b][/quote]
True, but as I already have said, gun kills much easier and is much harder to defend against.
[quote][b]No, the gun does not allow someone to threaten you. In high school (or anywhere, for that matter), if a huge ass guy walks up to you and threatens you, it is still as scary and intimidating as a gun.[/b][/quote]
Of course it allows. How wouldn't it?
Sure a big ass guy threatening you can be scary, but what has that got to do with the subject? It's not as scary as a guy with a gun though.
[quote][b]So should we cut off everyones arms, so that you cant be robbed by someone (or get punched, or snap your neck).[/b][/quote]
LOL! Please....
[quote][b]You will never get me to lose my own guns with this logic. [/b][/quote]
Well, that's your choice, but I'm telling you it's bad choice. At least I've tried.
Btw, you said "my own guns", why would you need [b]many[/b] guns to defend yourself?
As I already said, it's a different matter though if you use them for hunting or sport.
[b]If the person who's threatening you does not have a gun then you wouldn't need a gun to defend yourself. [/b]
Tell that to a 100 pound woman when she's attacked by a much larger man. Or myself for example, I'm not a big guy, some dope on roids or drugs could take me out with just his fists easily. I have everything to loose, the goon holding me up has nothing to loose, you disarm the general public and you give the criminals a buffet of easy targets. I would hate to think what would happen if we transplanted some of the gangs in SouthEast DC to Finland to see what happens.
[b]Criminals can get their guns legally, [/b]
Really, how?
[b]Steal it from someone who has bought it legally, or illegally, [/b]
Yes, that's why they are criminals, they are outlaws, why should my privileges be restricted because of the deeds of someone else? It's a minute percentage of guns that are used in crimes that have been stolen from legal owners. So minute it doesn't warrant taking away my right/privilege.
[b]but illegal guns aren't available just like that to everyone as you may believe. [/b]
No, I know how readily available they are illegally even now. The police can't stop drugs. Drugs are illegal, and readily available. How could they stop gun smuggling? All you would do is create an even larger market for people who profit from black markets. You would be helping the criminals.
[b]You have to know the right people and have the right connections. [/b]
It's amazing how many people know the right people to get drugs… Maybe you've just been well sheltered from reality. Perhaps the problem is you are a good citizen, and don't hang out with the crowd that could get you a gun easily. Yes?
[b]That's what makes having guns so easily available legally a problem. People are what they are and making guns as hard to get as possible is everyone's benefit. [/b]
If your whole argument is based on the theory that since criminals can get guns legally (which I disagree with), or can steal them from legal owners (which is a very rare occurrence) you should take firearms from the hands of law abiding citizens then I think your argument is very weak.
Explain Switzerland. "In this country every male between aged 20 to 42 is required by law to keep firearms, including pistols, at home; every reserve keeps his assault rifle at home and every soldier takes his rifle home. Moreover, once a soldier retires he is entitled to keep his weapon, whether it be a rifle or a pistol. Not only that, but ordinary citizens are even allowed to buy military assault rifles." [url="http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html"]http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html[/url] [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm[/url]
You are welcome to do what you want in Finland. However, if you use one Euro to try and change things here in the US or worldwide you are full of yourself to think that you have any right to try and limit my rights/privileges.
Do you support the UN attempts to ban private ownership of firearms worldwide?
In summary: What about the woman, or a small male? What about the black-market growth a ban would result in? What about Switzerland and its lack of a connection between guns and crime?
[This message has been edited by Konrad (edited 11-26-2002).]
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b] Well, if so that's good, but how many people are buying guns solely for self defence purpose?
- PJH[/b][/quote]
First of all, huge difference, its 4 out of 10 versus a possible 3 out of 10, and if the UN is correct well then hell you have 5 out of 10 households with guns..
Secondly, we dont know how many people buy firearms entirely for self defense, and if they do, why is it so wrong.. I own a handgun.. its secured, I shoot it occasionaly. And Im probably about as likely to use it as I am our Tornado/Earthquake/flood/volcanic eruption/natural dister contingency kit, you know the one the Red Cross keeps harping at you to have?
And your blanket statement that no fin owns a gun for any defensive reason at all? are you sure of that? they might not own handguns or Uzi's (hell almost nobody here owns uzi's, damn hollywood) Im sure that like most gun owners here personal defense isnt the sole reason for the purchase its probably on the list somewhere.
Switzerland is a good example of a genuine modern militia where the general populus is involved with homeland defence, ( its a shame the bankers actually do the defending but anyhoo), where the US second ammendment would make sense.
In fact, come to think of it, would the entire US population like to do national service in the armed forces in order to maintain the reason to have a second ammendment ?
You would be suprised I think, Those who wanted firearms probably would serve. Im one of the few gun owners I know who hasn't served in the military, but my goal after getting my degree's is to work on the civilian side of the DOD [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
The second amendment falls under the bill of rights. The bill of rights is about protecting the rights of private citizens from the government nothing else. The second amendment has nothing to do with a government-organized militia, it has to do with the private right to own a firearm and the protection of that right from the government. What you would/will say is not my interpretation of the amendment, and that was not the drafters intentions.
[quote]Originally posted by Konrad:
[b]Tell that to a 100 pound woman when she's attacked by a much larger man. Or myself for example, I'm not a big guy, some dope on roids or drugs could take me out with just his fists easily.[/b][/quote]
Like I said, there are other ways to defend yourself than using a gun. If you really don't know any yourself, you really should stop living in a cave.
[quote][b]I have everything to loose, the goon holding me up has nothing to loose, you disarm the general public and you give the criminals a buffet of easy targets. I would hate to think what would happen if we transplanted some of the gangs in SouthEast DC to Finland to see what happens.[/b][/quote]
LOL!
[quote][b]Really, how?[/b][/quote]
Like I said, nobody is a criminal when born. They become criminals at some point in their lives. A man can buy a gun legally and then become a criminal. There you have it, a criminal with a legally bought gun.
Another example for you: Criminals who haven't been caught. They are good law abiding citizens in front of law and other people, but are actually criminals. They can buy a legal weapon as well.
There are also different kind of criminals. Some can buy a gun legally even after doing something illegal. It depends on what they have done.
[quote][b]Yes, that's why they are criminals, they are outlaws, why should my privileges be restricted because of the deeds of someone else? It's a minute percentage of guns that are used in crimes that have been stolen from legal owners. So minute it doesn't warrant taking away my right/privilege.[/b][/quote]
Really? Only a minute percentage are stolen from legal owners? But aren't the majority of criminals guns then LEGALLY BOUGHT?
Your statements are quite contradicting my friend.
[quote][b]No, I know how readily available they are illegally even now. The police can't stop drugs. Drugs are illegal, and readily available. How could they stop gun smuggling? All you would do is create an even larger market for people who profit from black markets. You would be helping the criminals.[/b][/quote]
So drugs should be legalized then and make them legally easily available?
[quote][b]It's amazing how many people know the right people to get drugs… Maybe you've just been well sheltered from reality. Perhaps the problem is you are a good citizen, and don't hang out with the crowd that could get you a gun easily. Yes?[/b][/quote]
I think it's [b]you[/b] who has been well sheltered from reality.
Sure you can get drugs easily because they are [b]so common[/b]. Guns [b]are not[/b] as common. There are way much more drug users and dealers than gun users and dealers. I sure could get drugs if I wanted fairly easily, but I couldn't get a gun even close that easily.
[quote][b]If your whole argument is based on the theory that since criminals can get guns legally (which I disagree with), or can steal them from legal owners (which is a very rare occurrence) you should take firearms from the hands of law abiding citizens then I think your argument is very weak.[/b][/quote]
Actually, your arguments have so far been weak. Read what just said above.
And you're misquoting me. I did say that guns for use in hunting and sports are ok. Don't just take parts of each specific matter I said if you're going to quote me.
[quote][b]Explain Switzerland. "In this country every male between aged 20 to 42 is required by law to keep firearms, including pistols, at home; every reserve keeps his assault rifle at home and every soldier takes his rifle home. Moreover, once a soldier retires he is entitled to keep his weapon, whether it be a rifle or a pistol. Not only that, but ordinary citizens are even allowed to buy military assault rifles." [url="http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html"]http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html[/url] [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm[/url][/b][/quote]
So, what about that? What should I explain to you?
If you mean that they don't have any more killings than your country, or my country, that only tells that Swiss people are a great bunch of people who are not killing each other like crazy. I wouldn't recommend to do same in USA though. There's nothing else to say.
[quote][b]You are welcome to do what you want in Finland. However, if you use one Euro to try and change things here in the US or worldwide you are full of yourself to think that you have any right to try and limit my rights/privileges.[/b][/quote]
LOL!
[quote][b]Do you support the UN attempts to ban private ownership of firearms worldwide?[/b][/quote]
No.
[quote][b]In summary: What about the woman, or a small male? What about the black-market growth a ban would result in? What about Switzerland and its lack of a connection between guns and crime?[/b][/quote]
I've already answered to the 1st and 3rd questions above.
About black market growth: I don't think that black market of gun selling would really much grow if guns were generally banned to buy for self defense purpose. However, exception could be of course if you could provide a really really good proof that you absolutely need a gun for protection, due to some special circumstances. That I can understand and would allow, because then you would have a [b]true need[/b] for it.
And if the black markets would grow, then wouldn't it grow only because part of those "law abiding citizens" would form that growth in the markets? The ban wouldn't make any more criminals who would use guns for crimes. What harm would that cause "criminal wise"? And if they were really law abiding citizens, then they wouldn't buy black market guns and use them for crimes either, don't you agree?
[quote]Originally posted by Tyvar:
[b]And your blanket statement that no fin owns a gun for any defensive reason at all? are you sure of that? they might not own handguns or Uzi's (hell almost nobody here owns uzi's, damn hollywood) Im sure that like most gun owners here personal defense isnt the sole reason for the purchase its probably on the list somewhere.[/b][/quote]
I did say that some people here have guns for self defense, but the number is so small that it's not any way comparable to the USA. And those people have a permission of authorities to have it for that purpose because of special circumstances they have. You can't buy a gun here legally for self defence purpose just like that. [b]Normally[/b] you can buy a gun only for hunting or sports and you usually also have to belong to some club. It's well regulated, so that not just anyone can buy a gun just like that without knowing for what purpose he/she wants to get it and use it for.
[b]Like I said, there are other ways to defend yourself than using a gun. If you really don't know any yourself, you really should stop living in a cave. [/b]
No, Indeed I can't think of a form of self defense where a smaller man or woman could defend themselves and their property from a strong or drugged criminal with a knife, bat, or black market purchased gun without risking additional injury to themselves. [I consider your 'cave' comment an unnecessary snipe and not part of a productive dialogue.]
[b]Like I said, nobody is a criminal when born. They become criminals at some point in their lives. A man can buy a gun legally and then become a criminal. [/b]
You are correct, however I don't agree that this warrants disarming those of us who are still and will be good people. Or even worse, by banning guns turning good people like me into non violent criminals.
A law banning guns doesn't stop people who don't care for the law from committing crimes, or buying a gun on the black market and using the gun if they so choose in the commission of that crime.
I stand by my comment that it is not the gun, it is the person committing the crime that is the problem. Why punish me and limit my privileges as a good citizen.
[b]Really? Only a minute percentage are stolen from legal owners? But aren't the majority of criminals guns then LEGALLY BOUGHT? [/b]
No, many are brought into the country by the same people who bring us the drugs, the rest are purchased with the intention to resell to criminals which is an illegal act, the few remaining 12% are purchased with the intent to commit a crime so they were not purchased legally either. I would add that since the implementation of instant background checks with not registration the number of guns sold in licensed shops to criminals has dropped to virtually zero. Very few criminals start their criminal career with a gun crime, instead they start with petty crimes that causes them to loose their right/privilege to buy a gun legally. In the event of an all out ban the black market would pick up the slack.
"According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from - a street buy, or an illegal source for 80% " [url="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/"]http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/[/url]
Banning guns from private hands in the US will not stop the criminals from getting the guns if they want them. The increased nuisance factor that would be created for the criminal would not outweigh the negative effects on safety that the previously legal gun owning general public would to experience.
[b]So drugs should be legalized then and make them legally easily available? [/b]
That is a gross misrepresentation of where I'm coming from.
[b]Sure you can get drugs easily because they are so common. Guns are not as common. I couldn't get a gun even close that easily. [[/b]
In the United States and many other countries I know you are wrong. There are FAR more gun owners than I think you know about. Just one small example: I have a friend in France who lives in the wine country, by his accounts nearly half of the residents have handguns from the WWII era illegally and the ammunition to use them. Another example: I also know two people who distributed drugs AND guns personally (No, they are not friends of mine), both are now in jail. The sale of drugs happens far more often because drugs are a consumable. So yes, illegal gun sales happen less often, but that is because you only need to buy a handgun once because it will last a lifetime.
[b]If you mean that they don't have any more killings than your country, or my country, that only tells that Swiss people are a great bunch of people who are not killing each other like crazy. [/b]
EXACTLY! It's not the guns; it's the people. Spend money on corrections, and education instead of enforcing gun bans and registration. Fix the problem; don't take away my rights and privileges to defend myself from the criminal element as I see fit. Gun bans are just a Band-Aid and Switzerland proves my point, access to guns by the general population is not the problem.
[b]However, exception could be of course if you could provide a really really good proof that you absolutely need a gun for protection, due to some special circumstances. That I can understand and would allow, because then you would have a true need for it. [/b]
That's kind of funny, now you're into micro-management. I've become aware that you think you are a brilliant and have only the benefit of everyone else in mind from another thread. However I don't see how you could draw that line yourself and review every individual situation fairly. Frankly, that's the other reason I'm a happy gun owner; is to protect myself from people like you who think you are all good and would micro manage my privileges and life. If you were ever to be in a position of power you would be an even greater danger to liberty, choice, and privilege everywhere in the world than Bush or Gore. I can just see a person like yourself sweet talking your way into a postion of power here in the US, and it makes me sick.
[b]And if the black markets would grow, then wouldn't it grow only because part of those "law abiding citizens" would form that growth in the markets? [/b]
In part yes, and I would be one of them. You would turn me into a non-violent criminal.
[b]The ban wouldn't make any more criminals who would use guns for crimes. [/b]
You are right, the whole point of everyting I have said is that it wouldn't stop any criminals either.
[b]And if they were really law abiding citizens, then they wouldn't buy black market guns and use them for crimes either, don't you agree? [/b]
You are correct. Some of us here in the states, Canada, and down under have a phrase: "Out of my cold, dead hands." However, I still would not be a violent criminal or thief, unless I used that firearm in a self-defense situation. Since you would in effect be making it criminal to use a gun in self-defense.
In summary: You said it yourself, people are the problem, Swizterland is the perfect example of guns not resulting in high crime rates. Banning guns for the purpose of self defense from the general population doesn't stop crime, it only takes away yet another choice/priviage/right the good public in the United States currently enjoys.
The Record, Stockton, CA, 2/18/95:
"A Stockton, California, real estate agent put an end to an attempted rape, after a man posing as a potential home buyer attacked her in a model home. Crumpling to the floor, the realtor drew a .380 from her purse, forcing the man to flee. Pursuing him outside, the woman fired several shots at the man, missing him as he jumped in his car. She halted his escape by shooting out one of his tires and with the help of some nearby construction workers, held the thug for police. The would-be rapist is being investigated in connection with a similar 1993 attack on a female real estate agent."
News-Herald, Lenoir City, Tenn., 5/3/00
Media reports of a dangerous fugitive were still fresh in the mind of a Mount Pleasant, Tenn., resident when he went to check on his dogs, which had suddenly begun barking. The man's worst fears were confirmed when he spotted a figure lurking nearby and recognized him as the person police were seeking. Fortunately, the property owner had first armed himself with a gun. "Basically, [the resident] subdued him until law enforcement arrived," said Monroe County Sheriff Doug Watson. The suspect was being sought in connection with the abduction and rape of a 19-year-old woman the previous week.
[This message has been edited by Konrad (edited 11-27-2002).]
[quote][b]That's kind of funny, now you're into micro-management. I've become aware that you think you are a brilliant and have only the benefit of everyone else in mind from another thread. However I don't see how you could draw that line yourself and review every individual situation fairly. Frankly, that's the other reason I'm a happy gun owner; is to protect myself from people like you who think you are all good and would micro manage my privileges and life. If you were ever to be in a position of power you would be an even greater danger to liberty, choice, and privilege everywhere in the world than Bush or Gore. I can just see a person like yourself sweet talking your way into a postion of power here in the US, and it makes me sick.[/b][/quote]
Oh now you're going to personalities! How am I not surprised though. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/rolleyes.gif[/img]
Well, I can only thank you for writing that part, because it revealed to me what kind of person you really are. Also the mere enthusiasm how you defend something like [b]guns[/b] already tells a lot about you and your values. Thanks very much.
I'm ending this conversation now, because of what you said there and because I have no time nor will to waste my time anymore into this pointless discussion. It's like trying to teach common sense to a brickwall.
Have a happy life in your screwed up dreamworld kid. And remember, don't shoot other people with your gun, it's not a toy.
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b] I did say that some people here have guns for self defense, but the number is so small that it's not any way comparable to the USA. And those people have a permission of authorities to have it for that purpose because of special circumstances they have. You can't buy a gun here legally for self defence purpose just like that. [b]Normally[/b] you can buy a gun only for hunting or sports and you usually also have to belong to some club. It's well regulated, so that not just anyone can buy a gun just like that without knowing for what purpose he/she wants to get it and use it for.
- PJH[/B][/quote]
Thats nice, so still the UN claims half of Finland owns a gun, so its evidently not THAT well restricted or regulated, while it may be very difficult to aquire a handgun, as late as 1998 in order to have a valid reason to purchase a rifle or shotgun you just had to have a local hunting liscence, NOT a firearms club membership, although that probably hasnt changed
Got another question for you, at one point the american shooting community throughly enjoyed the finish government position that Silencers and Suppressors were "hearing protection" and they were completely legal, where as they are banned in the united states except for those posessing a FFL which isnt a easy thing to get.
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 11-27-2002).]
[quote]Originally posted by Konrad:
[b][b]I stand by my comment that it is not the gun, it is the person committing the crime that is the problem. Why punish me and limit my privileges as a good citizen.
[/b][/quote]
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b]Also the mere enthusiasm how you defend something like [b]guns[/b] already tells a lot about you and your values...[/B][/quote]
Enthusiasm in defending a right to bear arms. Guns aren't evil any more than the computer a hacker uses to steal your identity... They are tools. Guns have put food on the table for years, and will continue to do so when society and civilization fails. Guns are an equal force against oppression and tyranny. Owning a gun makes no comment good or bad about my values. It's how I use it or elect not to use it that reveals my values.
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b]...into this pointless discussion. It's like trying to teach common sense to a brickwall.[/b][/quote]
What you call common sense, I call one more right you want to take away from me, just because you don't agree with my philosophy.
PJH, it doesnt even sound like you live in the US? If not, then back the hell off with trying to take my damn rights away. If you do, then party on, just lets try not to get to violent here... [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img] But seriously, you have not listened (or read) what I have posted. Sure, killing with a knife is harder, but if I want to kill a woman or weak man with a knife is anything going to stop me (besides luck?). Garoteting is where you take a thin sharp thing (such as piano wire) and come up behind someone and choke them to death or cut there windpipe with it. Give me one good way for a suprised five foot woman to defend herself from an attacker with a knife. Traditional self defense will not help for long against a large guy (or even girl). What do my personal opinions about gun ownership (or anyones opinion) reveal what kind of person I really am? PJH, you have not presented one logical argument here without becoming insulting and degrading. As I said before, even if I hated guns I would not take away guns. Why? Because once you say it is ok to change the Bill of Rights, what goes next? How about freedom of religion? After all, by following a different religion than I do "revealed to me what kind of person you really are. Also the mere enthusiasm how you defend something like [religion] already tells a lot about you and your values. Thanks very much."
Or how about freedom of speech? If we say it is ok to change one, how easy will it be to change another, and another, until there are none left?
PJH, dont start getting all insulting just because we dont agree... As the philosopher Rodney King once said, "Cant we all just get along?" [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
To put the whole thing shortly and simply:
Yes, it is the person committing the crime, but it is the person committing the crime [b]with a gun[/b]. It is the combination of [b]both[/b] and obviously you can't eliminate the person from that equation (* See also below), so there's only one thing left in that equation and that is the gun. You may never get rid of them complitely, but at least you could try your best to eliminate their use in the crimes and regulating guns more strictly would be one way and one step to do that.
Of course you should also try to affect to the behaviour and mental growth of the people and that way affect to those people who do and might do such crimes now, or in the future. (*)But as I've already said, unfortunately people are what they are and there will always be criminals in this world and criminals who are ready to use guns, so that will never solve the problem complitely. That's why we must also try to affect to the availability of guns and more strict legal regulating is one of the ways among many. [b]And btw[/b], that would also serve as a message and as an education of a more healthy gun culture to the young kids as well.
I have nothing more to say about this topic, so I'm not going to repeat myself any more with new replies. I may still reply though, if I find it useful and if I have something new to add.
Oh one more thing I wanted to ask from you: Why don't you then use gunbelts and carry your guns in holsters? That way you could have the gun always with you where ever you are and you could get it in hand quickly in case someone attacks you. It makes perfectly sense doesn't it? Actually, why wouldn't you use even assault rifles instead of farely limited hand guns/pistols/revolvers, or some other more effective weapons in case a whole gang of criminals attacks you, or threatens you with guns? In fact wouldn't it be better against a normal hand gun too, so you could outgun the criminal? Afterall with a normal hand gun you are only equal in firepower, right? Why couldn't a normal law abiding citizen buy an assault rifle? Just make them to go through courses to get education to use them properly. That wouldn't cause any harm to anyone. They wouldn't go out and kill people, or rob stores and banks using them, only criminals do! Makes also perfect sense by your standards, doesn't it Konrad?
[quote]Originally posted by JackN:[b]Enthusiasm in defending a right to bear arms.[/b][/quote]
Enthusiasm in defending something which is not very rational, or even needed.
[quote][b]Guns aren't evil any more than the computer a hacker uses to steal your identity...They are tools. Guns have put food on the table for years, and will continue to do so when society and civilization fails. Guns are an equal force against oppression and tyranny.[/b][/quote]
Yes, exactly, they are tools, tools meant to do evil things. Killing and wounding living beings. Destroying things. Excluding those I already mentioned at least twice already, hunting and sports.
And like already said about spoons, computers don't kill either, guns do in hand of criminals.
[quote][b]Owning a gun makes no comment good or bad about my values. It's how I use it or elect not to use it that reveals my values[/b][/quote]
I agree, it doesn't. It's [b]the purpose you own the gun for[/b] that reveals your values + those you already mentioned.
[quote][b]What you call common sense, I call one more right you want to take away from me, just because you don't agree with my philosophy.
Comments
[b]Tyvar mate... I know what you mean. In general the 'shooting community' is good, but somewhere, there's soemthing distinctly 'off' in the fridge.
America's collective psyche has some sort of unhealthy obsession with guns.
and yeah... like I said in other posts...
raze Hollywood,
Nuke Rupert Murdoch, CNN, PBL... etc etc etc...
TV and radio are heroin for eyes and ears.[/b][/quote]
See thats just IT alot of what your seeing of that "radical fringe" is created by a media thats hostile to gun ownership in general. You have to realize the actual rate of gun ownership is probably about 30% of the population, which means the ther 70% by and large have no clue. You have 78 million gun owners, versus what 180 some odd milliion non gun owners. Whats really going on is an obsession with violence, and guns are just the most effective tool for that violence.
And that isnt american SB, that obsession with violence has been getting worse since about 1900, it is the fundamental underpining of all the isms of the last century and today.. hate and violence, behind communism,"fascisim (which is nothing more then militant socialisim, to many people forget the fascists had planned centralized economies) REACTIONARY Islamisim (its not radical people, what the hell are you thinking, its a return to religious conservatism, Jerry Falwell is a basicly a non violent Bin Laden)
Anyways, there is nothing wrong with being a "gun nut" as in having a avid interest in firearms and their functioning, design, creation, or such, much like there is nothing wrong with being a "car nut" what the proble is, is with the amount of hate and desire to kill people.
Part of it is the damn jaded cynical whimpy media which puts out all this crap, says its "cool" then refuses to deal with the consequences.
Another part Im not sure of, Maybe at some point raw evil just got turned loose, I dont know how to explain it.
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 11-19-2002).]
[b]Another part Im not sure of, Maybe at some point raw evil just got turned loose, I dont know how to explain it.[/b][/quote]
The Christians might point to Revelation and say that Satan has been cast down to Earth, and that we are in the Tribulation... [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
They wouldn't be far from the truth I think in some ways...
Anywho...
80 years of mad ideology and power caused the death of more human beings then had ever lived prior to about 1700, kinda scary..
And reactionarly islam is about to do the same I am afraid
[b]One of my favorite quotes, "Guns are no more responsible for killing people than the spoon is for making Oprah fat."[/b][/quote]
Oh please....
You can't kill people with spoons. With guns you can. And not only that, but what is important here is, that it is [b]extremely easy[/b] to kill with guns and if guns are [b]easily available[/b] then killing is [b]easy too[/b]. That's the point.
In a way guns [b]are[/b] "responsible", because they are there "at hand", "within reach", because they are everywhere and available and accepted and an easy choice, which might even encourage to kill as opposed to having to do it with a knife for example, which takes much more to kill.
If the killer would have no gun killing would most definitely be [b]much harder[/b] don't you think? Sure you can kill with a car, or a knife, or even with a lamp, but those are not made primarily and solely for killing and it's much harder to kill using those things. There's no need to be available unnecessarily even more equipment, which you can use to kill and which makes it all that much easier. Killing should be made as hard as possible, don't you agree?
There are plenty enough other ways to defend yourself and avoid to be attacked. A civilized society would encourage and develope those other means instead of "giving weapons for everyone".
Now if there's no other way than use a gun to defend you in a society, then there's something horribly wrong in that society. I definitely wouldn't want to live in that kind of a society myself. No way.
"Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
No thanks! [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/icons/icon13.gif[/img]
- PJH
[b] "Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
- PJH[/b][/quote]
Why was a PERSON threatening you? The problem in that situation wasn't the gun, it's the person doing the threatening.
I'd also point out that most crimes committed with a gun are premeditated crimes to some degree, crimes of passion where an 'easily available' gun comes into play happen far less frequently.
Once again disarming the law abiding good public does nothing because the criminals will have their guns anyway.
No one is forcing a gun into your hands, just don't try and take mine from me.
Unless some idiot picks it up and uses it, it will never move, I have never heard of a gun going anywhere and shooting someone by itself!
So lets put the blame where it belongs on the jerks behind the gun!
American Guns don't kill people, American people kill!
------------------
[b]4 Thousand Throats can be cut in one night by a running Warrior[/b]
[b]Once again disarming the law abiding good public does nothing because the criminals will have their guns anyway.
No one is forcing a gun into your hands, just don't try and take mine from me.[/b][/quote]
You said it! [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[b]Oh please....
You can't kill people with spoons.[/b][/quote]
Tell that to the Hundred odd inmates that got shanked last week...
[img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[b] Oh please....
Now if there's no other way than use a gun to defend you in a society, then there's something horribly wrong in that society. I definitely wouldn't want to live in that kind of a society myself. No way.
"Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
- PJH[/b][/quote]
Uh man, this is kinda Ironic since Finland has a rate of private possesion of firearms second only to the United States, with figures ranging from 25 to as many as 50% (acording to a UN report) of households (I believe the 25% figure myself) And I know Finland is planning on implementing a national registration system, but has it actualy been set up yet? or is it still all at local level?
Sorry PJH the fact that you guys in Finland have alot of guns floating around, and your homicide rate is still on par with that of Europe (especialy with the recent trends in most of Europe) goes to show that there is something else wrong then guns.
[b] Why was a PERSON threatening you? The problem in that situation wasn't the gun, it's the person doing the threatening.[/b][/quote]
If the person who's threatening you does not have a gun then you wouldn't need a gun to defend yourself. Now if the threatening person does have a gun, then he is threatning you [b]with a gun[/b]. Then the problem [b]is[/b] the gun in the situation. Person can threaten you even without having a gun, but then it's far less dangerous.
Of course the problem ultimately is in the person who's doing it (then again isn't the problem ultimately in the society and parents who raise children!?), but what makes it possible to the criminal to threaten you is [b]the gun[/b]. Criminals can't threat you and do crimes without the means/equipment to do that.
[quote]I'd also point out that most crimes committed with a gun are premeditated crimes to some degree, crimes of passion where an 'easily available' gun comes into play happen far less frequently.[/quote]
Eh? It doesn't matter if the crime is premeditated or not. The same easily available gun comes to play in every single crime done with a gun. The harder it is to get a gun for your crime, the better is the change you don't get it and kill, or wound someone with it.
Criminals can get their guns legally, or [b]steal it from someone who has bought it legally[/b], or illegally, but illegal guns aren't available just like that to everyone as you may believe. You have to know the right people and have the right connections. I wouldn't know myself where to get a gun if I needed one for a crime and I couldn't get it legally either, because of our laws. I'd have to belong to some sports club, or have some other very good reason to get it and I should also prove it to the authorities before they give me a license. Plus they would check my background.
That's what makes having guns so easily available legally a problem. People are what they are and making guns as hard to get as possible is everyones benefit.
[quote]Once again disarming the law abiding good public does nothing because the criminals will have their guns anyway.[/quote]
The law abiding public? Just what the heck does that mean anyway? No one is criminal when they're born. People [b]become[/b] criminals and if they have a legally bought gun at home then it's easy and simple to use it in a crime. If they didn't have that gun at home, then there's a good change they don't get it at all making them far less dangerous. Every people belongs to law abiding public until they start doing crimes. Except those how are already done crimes and been caught. New criminals "are born" all the time.
[quote]No one is forcing a gun into your hands, just don't try and take mine from me.[/B][/quote]
I'm not, I'm trying to talk some common sense to you, so that you would give up your gun of your own will. Now if you need a gun for hunting, or sport that's a different matter.
And Tyvar.... the percentage of people who own one or more guns in here is nowhere near the percentage of the USA. And even if it was, we don't have guns for self defence against criminals. Nearly all of the guns in here are for hunting, because hunting is so popular due to our country's nature. The other reason is sports. No one here generally buys a gun for self defense. Only VERY VERY few aqcuires a gun for self defense and those are always people who are being threatened by criminals, because they are personally connected to them somehow.
- PJH
I bet the type of guns most commonly found in Finland match those here, there are more standard bolt action rifles and various makes of shotguns then there are handguns. Most people here buy weapons for hunting, and sporting purposes.
As I mentioned above, it is not any harder to kill someone with a knife or baseball bat. Anything can kill people. If someone wants to kill, there is nothing stopping them (save killing them first, or disabling them). There is no way to make killing harder.What other ways are there to defend yourself? How easy is it to defend yourself against someone with a gun than unless you have a gun.
"Here, take this gun and shoot everyone with it who threatens you."
It's better than dying yourself...
If you die from a gun or knife, there is no difference. You are still just as dead. No, the gun does not allow someone to threaten you. In high school (or anywhere, for that matter), if a huge ass guy walks up to you and threatens you, it is still as scary and intimidating as a gun.
"Criminals can't threat you and do crimes without the means/equipment to do that."
So should we cut off everyones arms, so that you cant be robbed by someone (or get punched, or snap your neck).
You will never get me to lose my own guns with this logic.
[b]
Uhmm Dude, if 25% of housholds there have guns thats not to far away from our 40%, and if the UN was right with the 50% number, you might even surpass us.[/b][/quote]
25% is not much different than 40%??? It's [b]A HUGE[/b] difference!
[quote][b] I bet the type of guns most commonly found in Finland match those here, there are more standard bolt action rifles and various makes of shotguns then there are handguns. Most people here buy weapons for hunting, and sporting purposes.[/b][/quote]
Well, if so that's good, but how many people are buying guns solely for self defence purpose?
- PJH
[b]You tell me that spoons dont kill people. It is a metaphor for the food. Tell the millions of obese people who will die from heart attacks and other eating related diseases that food can't kill.[/b][/quote]
That's a different matter entirely. You see, you can't use those things to kill people. If people kill themselves with food, or whatever it's their own fault.
[quote][b] Anyways, if I want to kill someone, I can just get a knife. So should we ban all knives?[/b][/quote]
No, because knives have a different primary purpose of use. They are not made for killing, guns are.
Besides, killing with a knife is nowhere near as easy as with a gun. It takes a whole lot more both mentally and physically to kill with a knife and it gives the victim much better change to defend himself/herself than against a gun. And a change of people getting only wounded instead of getting killed when using knives is much better as opposed to using guns.
[quote][b]Killing is going to be easy no matter what. It is easy to snap someones neck if you know how. Garoteting someone takes no skill.[/b][/quote]
Killing is never easy. Snapping a neck? It's not that simple thing to do even if you knew how. First you got to get into that position against your opponent and then do it. Definitely not easy. Besides that's a different matter also, because you can't ban hands. That was a bad example.
Garoteting? I don't know what that means, so no comment on that.
Besides if killing was easy anyway, that's no excuse to not fight against it and try to make it harder.
[quote][b]Guns are easily availible because that is our constitutional right. And damn you all if you start trying to take away my constitutional rights.[/b][/quote]
That constitutional right is useless and outdated.
[quote][b]As I mentioned above, it is not any harder to kill someone with a knife or baseball bat. Anything can kill people.[/b][/quote]
It is much harder indeed.
[quote][b]If someone wants to kill, there is nothing stopping them (save killing them first, or disabling them).[/b][/quote]
Excuses.
Again, is that a reason not to try preventing people from killing each other any way you can?
Then why don't you give everybody a constitutional right to kill anyone you want if there's no way of stopping people to kill? Makes as much sense as what you're saying.
[quote][b]There is no way to make killing harder.What other ways are there to defend yourself?[/b][/quote]
What other ways? You really don't know any other way of defending yourlself than shooting with a gun? Please....
[quote][b]How easy is it to defend yourself against someone with a gun than unless you have a gun.[/b][/quote]
EXACTLY!
[quote][b]It's better than dying yourself...[/b][/quote]
But everyone who threatens you are not using a gun and everyone who threatens you with a gun are not going to kill you, or shoot at all.
[quote][b]If you die from a gun or knife, there is no difference. You are still just as dead.[/b][/quote]
True, but as I already have said, gun kills much easier and is much harder to defend against.
[quote][b]No, the gun does not allow someone to threaten you. In high school (or anywhere, for that matter), if a huge ass guy walks up to you and threatens you, it is still as scary and intimidating as a gun.[/b][/quote]
Of course it allows. How wouldn't it?
Sure a big ass guy threatening you can be scary, but what has that got to do with the subject? It's not as scary as a guy with a gun though.
[quote][b]So should we cut off everyones arms, so that you cant be robbed by someone (or get punched, or snap your neck).[/b][/quote]
LOL! Please....
[quote][b]You will never get me to lose my own guns with this logic. [/b][/quote]
Well, that's your choice, but I'm telling you it's bad choice. At least I've tried.
Btw, you said "my own guns", why would you need [b]many[/b] guns to defend yourself?
As I already said, it's a different matter though if you use them for hunting or sport.
- PJH
Tell that to a 100 pound woman when she's attacked by a much larger man. Or myself for example, I'm not a big guy, some dope on roids or drugs could take me out with just his fists easily. I have everything to loose, the goon holding me up has nothing to loose, you disarm the general public and you give the criminals a buffet of easy targets. I would hate to think what would happen if we transplanted some of the gangs in SouthEast DC to Finland to see what happens.
[b]Criminals can get their guns legally, [/b]
Really, how?
[b]Steal it from someone who has bought it legally, or illegally, [/b]
Yes, that's why they are criminals, they are outlaws, why should my privileges be restricted because of the deeds of someone else? It's a minute percentage of guns that are used in crimes that have been stolen from legal owners. So minute it doesn't warrant taking away my right/privilege.
[b]but illegal guns aren't available just like that to everyone as you may believe. [/b]
No, I know how readily available they are illegally even now. The police can't stop drugs. Drugs are illegal, and readily available. How could they stop gun smuggling? All you would do is create an even larger market for people who profit from black markets. You would be helping the criminals.
[b]You have to know the right people and have the right connections. [/b]
It's amazing how many people know the right people to get drugs… Maybe you've just been well sheltered from reality. Perhaps the problem is you are a good citizen, and don't hang out with the crowd that could get you a gun easily. Yes?
[b]That's what makes having guns so easily available legally a problem. People are what they are and making guns as hard to get as possible is everyone's benefit. [/b]
If your whole argument is based on the theory that since criminals can get guns legally (which I disagree with), or can steal them from legal owners (which is a very rare occurrence) you should take firearms from the hands of law abiding citizens then I think your argument is very weak.
Explain Switzerland. "In this country every male between aged 20 to 42 is required by law to keep firearms, including pistols, at home; every reserve keeps his assault rifle at home and every soldier takes his rifle home. Moreover, once a soldier retires he is entitled to keep his weapon, whether it be a rifle or a pistol. Not only that, but ordinary citizens are even allowed to buy military assault rifles." [url="http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html"]http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html[/url] [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm[/url]
You are welcome to do what you want in Finland. However, if you use one Euro to try and change things here in the US or worldwide you are full of yourself to think that you have any right to try and limit my rights/privileges.
Do you support the UN attempts to ban private ownership of firearms worldwide?
In summary: What about the woman, or a small male? What about the black-market growth a ban would result in? What about Switzerland and its lack of a connection between guns and crime?
[This message has been edited by Konrad (edited 11-26-2002).]
[b] Well, if so that's good, but how many people are buying guns solely for self defence purpose?
- PJH[/b][/quote]
First of all, huge difference, its 4 out of 10 versus a possible 3 out of 10, and if the UN is correct well then hell you have 5 out of 10 households with guns..
Secondly, we dont know how many people buy firearms entirely for self defense, and if they do, why is it so wrong.. I own a handgun.. its secured, I shoot it occasionaly. And Im probably about as likely to use it as I am our Tornado/Earthquake/flood/volcanic eruption/natural dister contingency kit, you know the one the Red Cross keeps harping at you to have?
And your blanket statement that no fin owns a gun for any defensive reason at all? are you sure of that? they might not own handguns or Uzi's (hell almost nobody here owns uzi's, damn hollywood) Im sure that like most gun owners here personal defense isnt the sole reason for the purchase its probably on the list somewhere.
In fact, come to think of it, would the entire US population like to do national service in the armed forces in order to maintain the reason to have a second ammendment ?
quite frankly I don't think so...
My questions still stand unanswered.
[b]Tell that to a 100 pound woman when she's attacked by a much larger man. Or myself for example, I'm not a big guy, some dope on roids or drugs could take me out with just his fists easily.[/b][/quote]
Like I said, there are other ways to defend yourself than using a gun. If you really don't know any yourself, you really should stop living in a cave.
[quote][b]I have everything to loose, the goon holding me up has nothing to loose, you disarm the general public and you give the criminals a buffet of easy targets. I would hate to think what would happen if we transplanted some of the gangs in SouthEast DC to Finland to see what happens.[/b][/quote]
LOL!
[quote][b]Really, how?[/b][/quote]
Like I said, nobody is a criminal when born. They become criminals at some point in their lives. A man can buy a gun legally and then become a criminal. There you have it, a criminal with a legally bought gun.
Another example for you: Criminals who haven't been caught. They are good law abiding citizens in front of law and other people, but are actually criminals. They can buy a legal weapon as well.
There are also different kind of criminals. Some can buy a gun legally even after doing something illegal. It depends on what they have done.
[quote][b]Yes, that's why they are criminals, they are outlaws, why should my privileges be restricted because of the deeds of someone else? It's a minute percentage of guns that are used in crimes that have been stolen from legal owners. So minute it doesn't warrant taking away my right/privilege.[/b][/quote]
Really? Only a minute percentage are stolen from legal owners? But aren't the majority of criminals guns then LEGALLY BOUGHT?
Your statements are quite contradicting my friend.
[quote][b]No, I know how readily available they are illegally even now. The police can't stop drugs. Drugs are illegal, and readily available. How could they stop gun smuggling? All you would do is create an even larger market for people who profit from black markets. You would be helping the criminals.[/b][/quote]
So drugs should be legalized then and make them legally easily available?
[quote][b]It's amazing how many people know the right people to get drugs… Maybe you've just been well sheltered from reality. Perhaps the problem is you are a good citizen, and don't hang out with the crowd that could get you a gun easily. Yes?[/b][/quote]
I think it's [b]you[/b] who has been well sheltered from reality.
Sure you can get drugs easily because they are [b]so common[/b]. Guns [b]are not[/b] as common. There are way much more drug users and dealers than gun users and dealers. I sure could get drugs if I wanted fairly easily, but I couldn't get a gun even close that easily.
[quote][b]If your whole argument is based on the theory that since criminals can get guns legally (which I disagree with), or can steal them from legal owners (which is a very rare occurrence) you should take firearms from the hands of law abiding citizens then I think your argument is very weak.[/b][/quote]
Actually, your arguments have so far been weak. Read what just said above.
And you're misquoting me. I did say that guns for use in hunting and sports are ok. Don't just take parts of each specific matter I said if you're going to quote me.
[quote][b]Explain Switzerland. "In this country every male between aged 20 to 42 is required by law to keep firearms, including pistols, at home; every reserve keeps his assault rifle at home and every soldier takes his rifle home. Moreover, once a soldier retires he is entitled to keep his weapon, whether it be a rifle or a pistol. Not only that, but ordinary citizens are even allowed to buy military assault rifles." [url="http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html"]http://www.newaus.com.au/news124guns.html[/url] [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1566715.stm[/url][/b][/quote]
So, what about that? What should I explain to you?
If you mean that they don't have any more killings than your country, or my country, that only tells that Swiss people are a great bunch of people who are not killing each other like crazy. I wouldn't recommend to do same in USA though. There's nothing else to say.
[quote][b]You are welcome to do what you want in Finland. However, if you use one Euro to try and change things here in the US or worldwide you are full of yourself to think that you have any right to try and limit my rights/privileges.[/b][/quote]
LOL!
[quote][b]Do you support the UN attempts to ban private ownership of firearms worldwide?[/b][/quote]
No.
[quote][b]In summary: What about the woman, or a small male? What about the black-market growth a ban would result in? What about Switzerland and its lack of a connection between guns and crime?[/b][/quote]
I've already answered to the 1st and 3rd questions above.
About black market growth: I don't think that black market of gun selling would really much grow if guns were generally banned to buy for self defense purpose. However, exception could be of course if you could provide a really really good proof that you absolutely need a gun for protection, due to some special circumstances. That I can understand and would allow, because then you would have a [b]true need[/b] for it.
And if the black markets would grow, then wouldn't it grow only because part of those "law abiding citizens" would form that growth in the markets? The ban wouldn't make any more criminals who would use guns for crimes. What harm would that cause "criminal wise"? And if they were really law abiding citizens, then they wouldn't buy black market guns and use them for crimes either, don't you agree?
- PJH
[b]And your blanket statement that no fin owns a gun for any defensive reason at all? are you sure of that? they might not own handguns or Uzi's (hell almost nobody here owns uzi's, damn hollywood) Im sure that like most gun owners here personal defense isnt the sole reason for the purchase its probably on the list somewhere.[/b][/quote]
I did say that some people here have guns for self defense, but the number is so small that it's not any way comparable to the USA. And those people have a permission of authorities to have it for that purpose because of special circumstances they have. You can't buy a gun here legally for self defence purpose just like that. [b]Normally[/b] you can buy a gun only for hunting or sports and you usually also have to belong to some club. It's well regulated, so that not just anyone can buy a gun just like that without knowing for what purpose he/she wants to get it and use it for.
- PJH
No, Indeed I can't think of a form of self defense where a smaller man or woman could defend themselves and their property from a strong or drugged criminal with a knife, bat, or black market purchased gun without risking additional injury to themselves. [I consider your 'cave' comment an unnecessary snipe and not part of a productive dialogue.]
[b]Like I said, nobody is a criminal when born. They become criminals at some point in their lives. A man can buy a gun legally and then become a criminal. [/b]
You are correct, however I don't agree that this warrants disarming those of us who are still and will be good people. Or even worse, by banning guns turning good people like me into non violent criminals.
A law banning guns doesn't stop people who don't care for the law from committing crimes, or buying a gun on the black market and using the gun if they so choose in the commission of that crime.
I stand by my comment that it is not the gun, it is the person committing the crime that is the problem. Why punish me and limit my privileges as a good citizen.
[b]Really? Only a minute percentage are stolen from legal owners? But aren't the majority of criminals guns then LEGALLY BOUGHT? [/b]
No, many are brought into the country by the same people who bring us the drugs, the rest are purchased with the intention to resell to criminals which is an illegal act, the few remaining 12% are purchased with the intent to commit a crime so they were not purchased legally either. I would add that since the implementation of instant background checks with not registration the number of guns sold in licensed shops to criminals has dropped to virtually zero. Very few criminals start their criminal career with a gun crime, instead they start with petty crimes that causes them to loose their right/privilege to buy a gun legally. In the event of an all out ban the black market would pick up the slack.
"According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from - a street buy, or an illegal source for 80% " [url="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/"]http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/[/url]
Banning guns from private hands in the US will not stop the criminals from getting the guns if they want them. The increased nuisance factor that would be created for the criminal would not outweigh the negative effects on safety that the previously legal gun owning general public would to experience.
[b]So drugs should be legalized then and make them legally easily available? [/b]
That is a gross misrepresentation of where I'm coming from.
[b]Sure you can get drugs easily because they are so common. Guns are not as common. I couldn't get a gun even close that easily. [[/b]
In the United States and many other countries I know you are wrong. There are FAR more gun owners than I think you know about. Just one small example: I have a friend in France who lives in the wine country, by his accounts nearly half of the residents have handguns from the WWII era illegally and the ammunition to use them. Another example: I also know two people who distributed drugs AND guns personally (No, they are not friends of mine), both are now in jail. The sale of drugs happens far more often because drugs are a consumable. So yes, illegal gun sales happen less often, but that is because you only need to buy a handgun once because it will last a lifetime.
[b]If you mean that they don't have any more killings than your country, or my country, that only tells that Swiss people are a great bunch of people who are not killing each other like crazy. [/b]
EXACTLY! It's not the guns; it's the people. Spend money on corrections, and education instead of enforcing gun bans and registration. Fix the problem; don't take away my rights and privileges to defend myself from the criminal element as I see fit. Gun bans are just a Band-Aid and Switzerland proves my point, access to guns by the general population is not the problem.
[b]However, exception could be of course if you could provide a really really good proof that you absolutely need a gun for protection, due to some special circumstances. That I can understand and would allow, because then you would have a true need for it. [/b]
That's kind of funny, now you're into micro-management. I've become aware that you think you are a brilliant and have only the benefit of everyone else in mind from another thread. However I don't see how you could draw that line yourself and review every individual situation fairly. Frankly, that's the other reason I'm a happy gun owner; is to protect myself from people like you who think you are all good and would micro manage my privileges and life. If you were ever to be in a position of power you would be an even greater danger to liberty, choice, and privilege everywhere in the world than Bush or Gore. I can just see a person like yourself sweet talking your way into a postion of power here in the US, and it makes me sick.
[b]And if the black markets would grow, then wouldn't it grow only because part of those "law abiding citizens" would form that growth in the markets? [/b]
In part yes, and I would be one of them. You would turn me into a non-violent criminal.
[b]The ban wouldn't make any more criminals who would use guns for crimes. [/b]
You are right, the whole point of everyting I have said is that it wouldn't stop any criminals either.
[b]And if they were really law abiding citizens, then they wouldn't buy black market guns and use them for crimes either, don't you agree? [/b]
You are correct. Some of us here in the states, Canada, and down under have a phrase: "Out of my cold, dead hands." However, I still would not be a violent criminal or thief, unless I used that firearm in a self-defense situation. Since you would in effect be making it criminal to use a gun in self-defense.
In summary: You said it yourself, people are the problem, Swizterland is the perfect example of guns not resulting in high crime rates. Banning guns for the purpose of self defense from the general population doesn't stop crime, it only takes away yet another choice/priviage/right the good public in the United States currently enjoys.
The Record, Stockton, CA, 2/18/95:
"A Stockton, California, real estate agent put an end to an attempted rape, after a man posing as a potential home buyer attacked her in a model home. Crumpling to the floor, the realtor drew a .380 from her purse, forcing the man to flee. Pursuing him outside, the woman fired several shots at the man, missing him as he jumped in his car. She halted his escape by shooting out one of his tires and with the help of some nearby construction workers, held the thug for police. The would-be rapist is being investigated in connection with a similar 1993 attack on a female real estate agent."
News-Herald, Lenoir City, Tenn., 5/3/00
Media reports of a dangerous fugitive were still fresh in the mind of a Mount Pleasant, Tenn., resident when he went to check on his dogs, which had suddenly begun barking. The man's worst fears were confirmed when he spotted a figure lurking nearby and recognized him as the person police were seeking. Fortunately, the property owner had first armed himself with a gun. "Basically, [the resident] subdued him until law enforcement arrived," said Monroe County Sheriff Doug Watson. The suspect was being sought in connection with the abduction and rape of a 19-year-old woman the previous week.
[This message has been edited by Konrad (edited 11-27-2002).]
Oh now you're going to personalities! How am I not surprised though. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/rolleyes.gif[/img]
Well, I can only thank you for writing that part, because it revealed to me what kind of person you really are. Also the mere enthusiasm how you defend something like [b]guns[/b] already tells a lot about you and your values. Thanks very much.
I'm ending this conversation now, because of what you said there and because I have no time nor will to waste my time anymore into this pointless discussion. It's like trying to teach common sense to a brickwall.
Have a happy life in your screwed up dreamworld kid. And remember, don't shoot other people with your gun, it's not a toy.
- PJH
[b] I did say that some people here have guns for self defense, but the number is so small that it's not any way comparable to the USA. And those people have a permission of authorities to have it for that purpose because of special circumstances they have. You can't buy a gun here legally for self defence purpose just like that. [b]Normally[/b] you can buy a gun only for hunting or sports and you usually also have to belong to some club. It's well regulated, so that not just anyone can buy a gun just like that without knowing for what purpose he/she wants to get it and use it for.
- PJH[/B][/quote]
Thats nice, so still the UN claims half of Finland owns a gun, so its evidently not THAT well restricted or regulated, while it may be very difficult to aquire a handgun, as late as 1998 in order to have a valid reason to purchase a rifle or shotgun you just had to have a local hunting liscence, NOT a firearms club membership, although that probably hasnt changed
Got another question for you, at one point the american shooting community throughly enjoyed the finish government position that Silencers and Suppressors were "hearing protection" and they were completely legal, where as they are banned in the united states except for those posessing a FFL which isnt a easy thing to get.
[This message has been edited by Tyvar (edited 11-27-2002).]
[b][b]I stand by my comment that it is not the gun, it is the person committing the crime that is the problem. Why punish me and limit my privileges as a good citizen.
[/b][/quote]
Hear Hear! [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[b]Also the mere enthusiasm how you defend something like [b]guns[/b] already tells a lot about you and your values...[/B][/quote]
Enthusiasm in defending a right to bear arms. Guns aren't evil any more than the computer a hacker uses to steal your identity... They are tools. Guns have put food on the table for years, and will continue to do so when society and civilization fails. Guns are an equal force against oppression and tyranny. Owning a gun makes no comment good or bad about my values. It's how I use it or elect not to use it that reveals my values.
[quote]Originally posted by PJH:
[b]...into this pointless discussion. It's like trying to teach common sense to a brickwall.[/b][/quote]
What you call common sense, I call one more right you want to take away from me, just because you don't agree with my philosophy.
[img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
Or how about freedom of speech? If we say it is ok to change one, how easy will it be to change another, and another, until there are none left?
PJH, dont start getting all insulting just because we dont agree... As the philosopher Rodney King once said, "Cant we all just get along?" [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
To put the whole thing shortly and simply:
Yes, it is the person committing the crime, but it is the person committing the crime [b]with a gun[/b]. It is the combination of [b]both[/b] and obviously you can't eliminate the person from that equation (* See also below), so there's only one thing left in that equation and that is the gun. You may never get rid of them complitely, but at least you could try your best to eliminate their use in the crimes and regulating guns more strictly would be one way and one step to do that.
Of course you should also try to affect to the behaviour and mental growth of the people and that way affect to those people who do and might do such crimes now, or in the future. (*)But as I've already said, unfortunately people are what they are and there will always be criminals in this world and criminals who are ready to use guns, so that will never solve the problem complitely. That's why we must also try to affect to the availability of guns and more strict legal regulating is one of the ways among many. [b]And btw[/b], that would also serve as a message and as an education of a more healthy gun culture to the young kids as well.
I have nothing more to say about this topic, so I'm not going to repeat myself any more with new replies. I may still reply though, if I find it useful and if I have something new to add.
Oh one more thing I wanted to ask from you: Why don't you then use gunbelts and carry your guns in holsters? That way you could have the gun always with you where ever you are and you could get it in hand quickly in case someone attacks you. It makes perfectly sense doesn't it? Actually, why wouldn't you use even assault rifles instead of farely limited hand guns/pistols/revolvers, or some other more effective weapons in case a whole gang of criminals attacks you, or threatens you with guns? In fact wouldn't it be better against a normal hand gun too, so you could outgun the criminal? Afterall with a normal hand gun you are only equal in firepower, right? Why couldn't a normal law abiding citizen buy an assault rifle? Just make them to go through courses to get education to use them properly. That wouldn't cause any harm to anyone. They wouldn't go out and kill people, or rob stores and banks using them, only criminals do! Makes also perfect sense by your standards, doesn't it Konrad?
- PJH
[quote]Originally posted by JackN:[b]Enthusiasm in defending a right to bear arms.[/b][/quote]
Enthusiasm in defending something which is not very rational, or even needed.
[quote][b]Guns aren't evil any more than the computer a hacker uses to steal your identity...They are tools. Guns have put food on the table for years, and will continue to do so when society and civilization fails. Guns are an equal force against oppression and tyranny.[/b][/quote]
Yes, exactly, they are tools, tools meant to do evil things. Killing and wounding living beings. Destroying things. Excluding those I already mentioned at least twice already, hunting and sports.
And like already said about spoons, computers don't kill either, guns do in hand of criminals.
[quote][b]Owning a gun makes no comment good or bad about my values. It's how I use it or elect not to use it that reveals my values[/b][/quote]
I agree, it doesn't. It's [b]the purpose you own the gun for[/b] that reveals your values + those you already mentioned.
[quote][b]What you call common sense, I call one more right you want to take away from me, just because you don't agree with my philosophy.
[img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img][/b][/quote]
Well, that's your right. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
- PJH