08-12-2001 00:58									#61
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by drake Oh jesus christ, here we go again. I talk about common sense and people jump on the "i have rights" wagon. We're talking about the right to own a friggin gun, gimme a break.

We're talking about the right to protect oneself.

quote: Ok, someone please help me out here. WIthout playing the constitution card, someone please give me 10 good reasons what benefit guns bring to society. Real legitimate reasons, not "because they're cool" david.

I'm not sure about ten, but I can give you at least one: because the right to own a gun helps insure that our way of life (meaning, our freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, right to liberty, etc.) is not threatened. I'm not sure if quantity of reasons outweights quality in this case, and I'd call this a pretty damn good reason.

	08-12-2001 01:09									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

No, actually we're not talking about the right to protect ones self here technofriend, we're talking about guns and gun control. Gun control IS about protecting people. And since when did one need a gun to protect themselves?

quote: I'm not sure about ten, but I can give you at least one: because the right to own a gun helps insure that our way of life (meaning, our freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, right to liberty, etc.) is not threatened. I'm not sure if quantity of reasons outweights quality in this case, and I'd call this a pretty damn good reason.

The right to own a gun does none of that. A private citizen doesnt need a gun to retain all of that. That is what local and federal agencies like police and military are for. People get paid to "protect and serve" both your community and your country. This line you give might have worked at the time of the revolutionary war, but this is a different time. The red coats ain't coming!!!

	08-12-2001 01:20									#63
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

DD - a) If there are 1000's of gun laws on the books and they don't cover having loaded guns in a school, then more laws are quite clearly needed.

b) If someone clearly breaks a just law, they should go to trial at least. In England, most of the country thought Tony Martin shooting unarmed burglars in the back and bum was a-ok, but a Jury, with all the facts was able to reach a more informed conclusion. If you're for greater enforcement, you should be for doing everything you can to get people who break gun-laws put in jail, which means sending people to trial even if you're unsure they'll get convicted.

	08-12-2001 01:40									#64
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Gibsie DD - a) If there are 1000's of gun laws on the books and they don't cover having loaded guns in a school, then more laws are quite clearly needed.

It is illegal for students to bring guns to school in the state of Mississippi. The question of weather that same law applies to responsible adults is a question for someone with far more time on thier hands than I. What with finals coming up in a few day and all.

quote: b) If someone clearly breaks a just law, they should go to trial at least.

Ideally, I would agree with you. However, in this case there were other factors in play here. Namely politics. I don't think that the DA wanted to tick off the voters by putting the local hero on trial over a case where no one was hurt. and having it bite him when the next election came around.

drake: People get paid to "protect and serve" both your community and your country. This line you give might have worked at the time of the revolutionary war, but this is a different time. The red coats ain't coming!!!

I'm sure this line really comforted the Japanese Americans who were thrown into concentration camps.

	08-12-2001 01:41									#65
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Wraith See, the thing is, defensive gun usages are rarely ratings-worthy. They're ususally not really flashy, since most of the time all you have to do is show the gun to get left alone. This means they're usually not even reported to the police. When they are flashy (like the clerk who killed a guy trying to take several customers hostage at gunpoint) they never seem to make the national media for some reason. Go figure.

Yeah, the media despises those human interest hero stories.

quote: Anyway, several studies have been done on this. The numbers range from 800,000 to 2.5 million defensive gun usages in the US every year.

I'd like to see a source on that one.

quote: And in Japan the suicide rate is several times what it is in the US, but they have far fewer guns. By your logic, lack of guns causes suicide.

No. Easily refuted by showing European suicide rates in comparison to Japan's. That case isn't about Guns, it's about their rigorous education system and their constant stress from a young age. That's been proven. That's the difference between Japan and the Euro-US west.

quote: Sorry, but two samples and your belief does not a causation make. You haven't even shown a correlation yet. If you don't like guns, fine, say so, but please make actual arguments.

We're doing just that. You're just making up things to show why we can't possibly be right, but it's not so. They're feeble attempts too, I can think of better.

quote: Yeah, our law enforcement officials are too busy pushing officers to arrest marijuana smokers to bother with gun dealers and convicted criminals attempting to buy weapons.

I'm personally against the war on drugs, so, what is your point?

quote: There are a large number of reasons for it. The US and the EU have quite dis-similar societies, so any direct comparison of the sort you guys want is difficult.

And gun control/lack of gun control is a major reason for that societal difference.

quote: Oh bullshit. Surveys conducted with inmates at state and federal prisons shows that over 80% say they can get a gun within a week of getting out of jail. Note, these are convicted criminals, and it's already illegal for them to buy guns. You think criminals are going to obey the laws in regards to buying guns?

This is because guns are legal. If they weren't, it would not be so easy. I assure you.

quote: Look, drugs are shipped into this country in ton lots.

Drug laws are really not that heavily enforced anyway. People get away with drug charges quite easily. It's also a lot harder to conceal a gun than it is to conceal drugs (I've seen some interesting ways of doing so...)

quote: Cars make them easy too. Right before one of the big media frenzies over a school shooting, one guy ran his car into a group of students in front of a school. He did admit to doing it on purpose, trying to kill people, but for some reason this story didn't really hit the national scene.

It's much easier to purposely kill with a gun than to purposely kill with a car. As far as drunk drivers, yeah, we should prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

quote: Which is a comment about stupid parents, not how evil guns are.

Take away the guns, no accidental shootings in the household.

quote: Nope. Supreme Court rulings say they only have to try to figure out who did them. They don't have any duty to try to stop them from happening.

Does that go for local and state as well?

quote: Individual rights are more important than anything.

No life, no ability to enjoy those rights. I think you need to reprioritize.

quote: If you start allowing exceptions to individual rights you aren't going to have the most fundamental one, the right to life, much longer either.

Tell it to Europeans.

	08-12-2001 01:50									#66
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Ah, gun control.

In what other topic can you find Rogan, spinky, MarkL, Drake and Chris all on the same side?

Gun control.

Weapons kill.

Most of you yahoos are too stupid/and or irresponcible to handle weapons.

Many people blow their fool heads off, or some other poor shmo's.

Guns make it so easy to kill, to feel like a big shot, like your somebody.

In fact, disire to own a weapon=Loser

Just proves you can't handle yourself.

That's why you see so many gangs making a cult of gun violence, because they don't have what it takes to really make it, guts.

Children being killed by guns.

People trying to work being killed by losers with guns.

Death, death, and more death.

People can argue it's their right, but than, so was owning a black man at one time. Kind of makes that argument silly, doesn't it?

OK, you can go back to the ranting again, later.

	08-12-2001 01:57									#67
	Suffering from ads?

quote: I'm sure this line really comforted the Japanese Americans who were thrown into concentration camps.

I fail to see any relation between the need for a gun at the time of the revolutionary war and the need for a gun today.

What was the point???

-------

800000- 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year? Yeah, I would also like to see where you got that un-countable stat
from

And when and where did I declare guns evil I specifically noted that it wasn't guns themselves that were the problem. They're just a peice of metal. The whole point is, people that have them dont need them. And people that need them are in a very very small minority.

	08-12-2001 01:57									#68
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Mark L The US Constitution has been changed quite often in the past. Why not change it again? Especcially since it causes so many deaths. And a homicide rate 7 times higher than in Europe is rather appaling for a western nation.

Because whe don't give a $hit what EUROPEANS think of our laws. That's reason enough right there. And if you want to continue to be statboy, please feel free to include all the miliions of HOMICIDES committed in Europe in the 1930's and 1940's in countries WITH gun control where private citizens were forbidden to own firearms. Then come back to us about homicide rates. Feel free to live in fantasyland until then.

And while we're talking about what's what for western nations, many in the US would suggest that European's rate of bathing, dental hygine, and taxation is appalling.

	08-12-2001 02:03									#69
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

ruffhaus...back in the 30's and 40's, even if the average family in europe wanted a gun, they probably couldnt. They weren't produced on even close to the same scale as today and were more expensive I'm sure comparitively.

Now today, you can get a saturday night special for 20-25 bucks if you knew where to look. The problem is that they're too accessible to anyone and everyone. And there is no need for it. With all these guns we're just increasing our odds for deaths. Its very simple math.

	08-12-2001 02:07									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by RUFFHAUS 8 Because whe don't give a $hit what EUROPEANS think of our laws.

Maybe it's not what Euros think of our laws, maybe it's what we think of theirs that's the problem.

quote: And if you want to continue to be statboy, please feel free to include all the miliions of HOMICIDES committed in Europe in the 1930's and 1940's in countries WITH gun control where private citizens were forbidden to own firearms.

Hmmm...during a time of Fascism? I think that negates your argument

quote: Then come back to us about homicide rates. Feel free to live in fantasyland until then.

Last I checked, Europe and America are both democratic places. Don't you think it's time we do away with stuff that we no longer need, and that only harms us?

	08-12-2001 02:14									#71
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by drake I fail to see any relation between the need for a gun at the time of the revolutionary war and the need for a gun today.

I gave you a recent example of the government not protecting the rights of its citizens. I'm sure I can give a more recent example than that if you wish.

quote: 800000- 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year? Yeah, I would also like to see where you got that un-countable stat

Right here: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html


BTW, I found a site that has news articles about defensive uses of guns: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/info...se.asp?CatID=43

	08-12-2001 03:11									#72
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by drake 800000- 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year? Yeah, I would also like to see where you got that un-countable stat from

From the research link on the NRA's website...

quote: Survey research during the early 1990s by criminologist Gary Kleck showed at least 2.5 million protective uses of firearms each year in the U.S. "(T)he best available evidence indicates that guns were used about three to five times as often for defensive purposes as for criminal purposes" (Kleck, Targeting Guns, 1997).

Might be at your local library...

quote: The whole point is, people that have them dont need them. And people that need them are in a very very small minority.

Thanks so much for your concern in attempting to determine what's good for the rest of the human race. Mind if we don't pay the slightest attention to your free advice?

- Scipio

	08-12-2001 03:39									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by drake No, actually we're not talking about the right to protect ones self here technofriend, we're talking about guns and gun control.

Yup. Increased gun control would probably decrease the murder rate (although not necessarily to the same low levels as in Europe or Japan), no argument there. It would also give citizens a reduced ability to protect themselves in times of instability, as in Berserker's example of the LA riots, and it would reduce their ability to stand up to tyranny. So, unless you are willing to argue that the police and military are always absolutely capable of maintaining order, and unless you are willing to argue that tyranny is an absolute impossibility in the US, then please admit that gun control will both increase and decrease our safety.

quote: Gun control IS about protecting people. And since when did one need a gun to protect themselves?

Again, see Berserker's example about the LA riots, as well as other examples given in this thread.

quote: The right to own a gun does none of that. A private citizen doesnt need a gun to retain all of that. That is what local and federal agencies like police and military are for. People get paid to "protect and serve" both your community and your country.

Agreed. But, they are not always able to maintain order.

quote: This line you give might have worked at the time of the revolutionary war, but this is a different time. The red coats ain't coming!!!

No, but the black helicoptors are.

Seriously, though, I currently have no inkling of a desire to join an armed uprising against the US government. However, so long as we are not governed by angels, I'll support the 2nd amendment.


I ought to clarify my position on gun control: I support the 2nd amendment, but see no problem with mandatory background checks so long as they are justly applied. I do have a problem with ineffectual gun control bills like the Brady Bill; 3% of all crimes were committed with assault weapons, but in the event of civil breakdown or tyranny assault weapons are the very weapons that you'd want the most, so outlawing the sale of assault weapons increases repression while failing to decrease the crime rate.

	08-12-2001 04:12									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Look, I think the argument comes down to this. From a legal standpoint, "a lot of people dying" really is NOT relevant.

The only relevant facts are the following:
1)The right to bear arms and to own guns are protected in multiple places by the US Constitution.
2)The Constitution can be amended to ban gun ownership.
3)Such a Constitutional amendment will NOT happen in the United States. Period. Even if there was Congressional support - which there isn't - there is not enough support in the States.

So all of these arguments are really moot points. Guns of any and all kinds - including everything from BB guns to heavy machine guns - are Constitionally legal in the US, regardless of federal law, and any attempt to amend the Constitution to ban guns would be a complete and utter failure.

That's all there is to it.

	08-12-2001 04:39									#75
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

drake

quote: Guns are for pussies. Just another tool for small men to feel compotent and compensate for their small jimmies.

source please.

quote: ...all I ever hear about guns is who they kill, not who they save.

It requires exhaustive research to dig up the news that the mainstream media chooses not to provide. Start here... Take a break every few minutes or your mouse click finger will begin to get very tired.

quote: ...I could go to the local sporting goods store, pick up a hunting rifle, a few cases of shells, walk to the local mall and smoke a few dozen people without breaking a sweat.

All the more reason to ensure that ordinary citizens to be able to pack... As you imply, there is no chance in hell that the lone mall security guard can do anything to stop this massacre. We'll have to rely on well armed citizens.

quote: Many parents in a pathetic attempt to "protect" their kids, have killed their kids by leaving weapons accessable to them. Many people have good intentions in buying guns, but between accidents and unforseen situations, they often do much more bad than they could ever do good.

Cherrypicking the data AND mixing in a bit of hot button BS, eh? Sorry. You'll have to do much better. The independent thinkers in your audience are not buying into the sob story. Come back with the risk benefit analysis for ALL defensive handgun uses vs accidental discharge deaths, and you'll see how pathetic you argument really is.

quote: Deaths don't matter as long as your rights to bear arms are protected by the constitution?

Our founding fathers and all those patriots who risked their lives to achieve independence for this country, salute you!

quote: Its this aggressive society. The society is ripe for violence. The abundance of guns just makes it too easy for anyone with the right mind, to become a very real danger to society.

source please.

quote: I talk about common sense and people jump on the "i have rights" wagon.

You idea of common sense is quite different than my own... I'll take mine!

quote: WIthout playing the constitution card, someone please give me 10 good reasons what benefit guns bring to society.

Sorry. It's not up to us to prove that we deserve to own guns. It is up to gun control advocates [that would be you] to prove that we shouldn't own guns. Hope to see some proof before too long.

quote: A private citizen doesnt need a gun to retain >freedoms<. That is what local and federal agencies like police and military are for. People get paid to "protect and serve" both your community and your country.

Law enforcement authorities cannot ordinarily protect citizens. They can only investigate crime and make arrests.

A lot of rhetoric from you, but now let's see those sources, shall we?

- Scipio

	08-12-2001 19:28									#76
	Increase the size of your Attachments

--"WIthout playing the constitution card, someone please give me 10 good reasons what benefit guns bring to society."

They're equalizers. They can give a 90 lb woman the ability to resist a 250 lb man. They give those who have something better to do with their time than constant weapons training a way to resist those who just want to beat everyone else into submission (ie. most to all fuedal lords). This is probably the most important reason; they give the weak a way to resist the strong.

--"That is what local and federal agencies like police and military are for."

These are some of the main groups we need protection from, actually...

And even if you are assuming the police are at your beck and call for defense, they can't be everwhere at once. Response times average 10 minutes or more in most areas. What are you supposed to do for those 10 minutes (assuming you can get to a phone, dial 911, explain the situation and tell them where you are)? Tell the guy he needs to embrace his inner-child and that it's not nice to mug people?

--"I'd like to see a source on that one."

This has been provided. Note that, unlike most of the pro-gun-control studies, this one was actually done by a criminologist who publishes in peer-review criminology journals. Most of the ones going the other way seem to be doctors publishing in medical journals and the like.

--"No. Easily refuted by showing European suicide rates in comparison to Japan's."

And the argument that was made prior to that is easily refuted by pointing to, say, the Swiss murder rates. That's my point. These kind of comparisons are far too simplistic to have any validity.

If anyone had actually bothered to look at the FBI UCR, you'd notice that non-gun related murders in the US make up around than 40% of the total. This means that even if you assume that every murder committed with a gun would not happen if they were banned, the US would still have a murder rate significantly higher than that of Europe. Since a fair chunk of gun-related murders seem also to be drug or gang related, it's pretty obvious that those murders would not just disappear. This rather points to a reason for the US murder rate besides gun ownership.

--"I'm personally against the war on drugs, so, what is your point?"

That we're looking at the wrong area. I'm glad you're against the WoD, but the government shouldn't be pushing it. We have historical evidence to suggest that this is a (if not the single biggest) reason behind the violent crime rates in the US. Just looking at violent crime rates over time as compared to the beginning and end of Prohibition and the beginning of the War on Drugs is very educational.

--"This is because guns are legal. If they weren't, it would not be so easy. I assure you."

This is through illegal means, not legal. Banning guns would not make a significant change here, if it had any effect at all.

--"It's also a lot harder to conceal a gun than it is to conceal drugs"

Note that I said "in ton lots". I'm not talking about a condom full of crack, I'm talking about major shipments.

--"As far as drunk drivers, yeah, we should prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law."

In he case I mentioned, the driver was not drunk. This was premeditated murder, pure and simple.

--"Take away the guns, no accidental shootings in the household."

Accidental shootings have been on a sharp decline lately, largely thanks to things like the NRA education programs. It is not at all difficult to teach a child that if they see a gun they should get an adult. Basic firearm safety is also not hard to learn (check the safety, check for chambered rounds, etc). Many of these accidental shootings are in homes where plenty of other dangers exist (one of the school shootings, for instance, was by a kid who found a gun, stolen no less, that his mother's boyfriend had left lying around in what was basically a crackhouse). I don't care what you do, these places will never be safe for children.
Not to mention that more kids currently drown in swimming pools than are accidentaly killed by a gun. No one's calling for a license to own a swimming pool.

That some people misuse their rights or are careless are not sufficent (nor suitable) arguments for taking away a right.

--"Does that go for local and state as well?"

IIRC, the ruling was specifically in regards to state and local law enforcement. Federal agencies usually do not have jurisdiction over most violent crimes, including murder.

--"No life, no ability to enjoy those rights. I think you need to reprioritize."

No other rights, you won't have a life either. All rights are equally important, and you cannot allow infrigement of one without damaging the others.

--"Tell it to Europeans"

I am. It's not my fault they decided they'd prefer government promises of safety. It is the easy way out, since excercising rights requires an effort. Just keep in mind that the US Bill of Rights was based on English Common Law, and that does include the right to bear arms.

--"Most of you yahoos are too stupid/and or irresponcible to handle weapons."

Ideas are far more dangerous than guns. Ideas have killed far more people throughout history, and are a lot harder to handle responsibly. Guess it's time to bring in the PsiCops.

--"Now today, you can get a saturday night special for 20-25 bucks if you knew where to look."

No one who knows anything about guns buys those things. They're dangerous to handle (if only because low-quality construction could cause untimely jamming), and that small calibre has little stopping power. The kind of people who want to use guns for crimes tend to have little patience for the kind of firing-range practice it requires to become dangerous with that calibre, and if they have the patience (and the firing-range membership) they can certainly afford a decent gun.

Besides, do you have something against poor people? They're most likely to be living in high-crime areas, which means they're the most likely people to benefit from owning a weapon. Since most defensive gun usages are nothing more than showing the gun, a saturday night special works adequately for the purpose, and sometimes that's all they can afford.

--"Last I checked, Europe and America are both democratic places"

Can't speak for all of Europe, but America is not a democratic place. It is a republican (not in the Elephant party sense) place. There's a reason the song is "The Battle Hymn of the Republic".

--"3% of all crimes were committed with assault weapons"

It was more like 1%, IIRC. However, "assault weapon" was a made-up category for the purpose of getting the bill passed. If you look at the language used, it basically means guns that are photogenicly suited to a gun-control argument (things like flash-suppressors and folding stocks are part of the argument).

Wraith
"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins."
-- Sammy "the Bull" Gravano

Last edited by Wraith on 08-12-2001 at 20:21

	08-12-2001 22:57									#77
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: In what other topic can you find Rogan, spinky, MarkL, Drake and Chris all on the same side?

Amazing. Chris and I agreeing on something other than Star Trek. great!


I have a few questions for the Americans here.

A. If guns are not the reason for the 7 times higher homicide rates, than what is?

B. People defend the right to bear arms "because it's in the Constitution". But the Constitution has been changed a lot over the years, so why can't it be changed again? Because something is in the constitution doesn't mean that it's decided for eternity. Laws should change from time to time, a constitution should be a changing living document, not a static dead one. Point is, can someone explain to me why "because it's in the constitution" is a valid argument in favor of guns, since the constitution has been changed a lot over the years.

	08-12-2001 23:35									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by orange Don't you think it's time we do away with stuff that we no longer need, and that only harms us?

Well you're absolutely right, of course. And thanks BTW for leaving me in sole charge of determining what 'stuff' is no longer needed. I appreciate your confidence in me to determine how best to manage your life for you.

1> Television and Video Games: These are clearly the work of the devil and must go. Proof? At least one of the boys that committed the Columbine High School killings was an avid player of the video game Doom.

2> Indoor plumbing/Swimming Pools: Think how many children have drowned because their parents left them unattended for a few minutes in a bathtub or swimming pool.

3> Electricity: Zzzzappped!

4> Cellphones/Car Radios/Women's Makeup Kits/Drive through Fastfood/Reading Material/Car Passengers: All of these things have been shown to have contributed to one or more fatalities due to distracted driving. I almost decided to outlaw automobiles completely, BTW.

5> Automobiles: What the He11.

More later...

- Scipio

	08-12-2001 23:38									#79
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Homicide stats:

From www.un.org, collected by the UN Statistics Division.

Intentional Homicides
(per 100,000 people, 1990-99)

Belgium: 2
Finland: 3
France: 1
Germany: 1
Greece: 2
Ireland: 1
Italy: 2
Luxembourg: 1
Netherlands: 1
Austria: 1
Portugal: 1
Spain: 1
Sweden: 1
United Kingdom: 1
Norway: 1
Albania: 6
Belarus: 10
Czech Republic: 2
Estonia: 20
Latvia: 18
Lithuania: 9
Poland: 3
Romania: 4
Russian Federation: 27
Slovak Republic: 2
Slovenia: 2
Ukraine: 25
Armenia: 25
Azerbaijan: 7
Georgia: 3
Kazakhstan: 19
Kuwait: 2
Kyrgyzstan: 11
Tajikistan: 10
Turkmenistan: 4
Uzbekistan: 4
Philippines: 12
Singapore: 1
Canada: 2
USA: 9
Costa Rica: 6
Cuba: 8
El Salvador: 27
Australia: 2
New Zealand: 2
Argentina: 4
Brazil: 19
Chile: 3
Colombia: 80
Ecuador: 13
Guyana: 5
Paraguay: 10
Uruguay: 4
Venezuela: 16

	08-12-2001 23:55									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Mark L If guns are not the reason for the 7 times higher homicide rates, than what is?

My guess is that stupid puritannical laws, like anti-drug laws, are a prime contributor.

quote: People defend the right to bear arms "because it's in the Constitution". But the Constitution has been changed a lot over the years, so why can't it be changed again?

It is theoretically possible to change the constitution in order to make gun ownership unconstitutional. However, it is highly unlikely that the amendment would ever get through Congress, let alone be ratified by 3/4 of the states.

quote: Laws should change from time to time

I would argue that there are some laws that should not change, for example the laws that make murder illegal.

quote: Point is, can someone explain to me why "because it's in the constitution" is a valid argument in favor of guns, since the constitution has been changed a lot over the years.

Because the rationale for putting the 2nd amendment in the constitution in the first place is still applicable today.

	08-12-2001 23:58									#81
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

--"If guns are not the reason for the 7 times higher homicide rates, than what is?"

Don't know, I'm no sociologist or psychologist. But as I tried to point out above, you simply cannot justly claim that it is the firearm ownership that's the problem.

Taking your numbers, combined with FBI UCR firearm-related vs. non-firearm-related numbers, your claim just doesn't work. Assuming that banning guns would stop every murder committed with a gun (obviously this is not going to happen, but this is a thought experiment) the US still has a murder rate 3-4 times higher than most of Europe.
You simply can not reasonably blame this on guns unless you're going to claim that guns exude some kind of field of evil that effects everyone within a ten mile radius, predisposing them towards violence.

--"But the Constitution has been changed a lot over the years, so why can't it be changed again?"

It can be changed, but show me a single gun-control advocacy group that's trying to do so.

--"Point is, can someone explain to me why "because it's in the constitution" is a valid argument in favor of guns, since the constitution has been changed a lot over the years."

Whether or not it's ever been changed is irrelevant to what you want. The right to bear arms is a part of the Bill of Rights, the fundamental protections from government that were required before the Constitution could be accepted in the first place. It's there because it's a very important right that they felt needed to be specifically protected. Getting rid of any of the Bill of Rights would amount to a fundamental change in this country's government (or openly admitting that change, at any rate).
Feel free to try to change it, but if you do manage, live with the consequences.

Wraith
"Pharmacists may not sell gunpowder to cure headaches."
-- Law in Trout Creek, Utah

	09-12-2001 00:06									#82
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by orange Case 1: Faded Glory

Moi?

I own plenty of firearms. I havent shot anybody (yet).
Tho when I lived in georgia ehen I was 13 I was shootin at a squirrel on a power line and the .22 bullet went through a window a half mile away. (I lived in a rural area of Columbus.....had no idea)

I agree......people need to take a government safety course. But we should never ban guns completely. Private ownership of firearms is the corner-stone to all freedoms/civil liberties.

	09-12-2001 00:21									#83
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Mark L A. If guns are not the reason for the 7 times higher homicide rates, than what is?

I believe a previous message indicated the "War on Drugs" as a strong candidate for those honors. Can't verify that with studies myself - but it certainly must be a factor. In fact there will actually be numerous factors driving criminal activities.

The underlying concept behind the theory that the WOD increaes homicides is that by outlawing a product, you automatically create a black market for the product - see alcohol prohibition in the US, for example. Large scale black markets usually fall under control of organized crime. In the US, organized crime employs local gangs as distributors and enforcers of their drug trade - because the best target market is youth. Large cities have multiple gangs and this leads to drug related turf wars involving frequent multiple homicides. Then there are the homicides from drug law enforcement related actions...

This is really off topic however, as numbers have been presented to show that gun ownership cannot possibly account for the 7 to 1 homicide rate difference.

quote: B. People defend the right to bear arms "because it's in the Constitution". But the Constitution has been changed a lot over the years, so why can't it be changed again?

Why should it be changed. You have presented no studies or proof that outlawing guns will enhance our quality of life. If it aint broke, don't fix it! Beside, there is no chance that gun control advocated can muster sufficient support to pass a constitutional amendment outlawing private ownership of guns. And who is going to take the guns away from the people who already own them? The horse is long out of the barn on this issue.

quote: Because something is in the constitution doesn't mean that it's decided for eternity. Laws should change from time to time, a constitution should be a changing living document, not a static dead one.

Procedures are in place for amending the Constituion. They will be followed in this matter. Rest easy on that.

quote: Point is, can someone explain to me why "because it's in the constitution" is a valid argument in favor of guns, since the constitution has been changed a lot over the years.

Don't see any particular reason to explain this to you. That's just the way it is. Accept it and move on with you life.

- Scipio

	09-12-2001 00:27									#84
	Inflate your Upload Space

Drugs are still very much illegal in most European countries, especcially hard-drugs. So I'm not sure if the US' ban/war on drugs can clarify the 7 times higher homicide rates. Also, the numbers I just posted are from 1990 to 1999, during most of that time various European countries were very anti-drugs.

	09-12-2001 00:34									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Guns are illegal in Cuba

But the Stats speak for themselves.

Laws wont prevent criminals from shooting someone. They intend to break the law anyway. ANti-Gun logic makes no sense. And theres no gun free nations out there.

	09-12-2001 00:52									#86
	Suffering from ads?

Cuba is a third world country, you can't honestly be comparing Cuba to the USA or EU.

Last edited by Saint Marcus on 09-12-2001 at 01:00

	09-12-2001 01:08									#87
	Remove this text

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people"

True, but I think it is probably easier psychologically to press a trigger and kill someone who satnds ten yards from you, than grabbing a baseball bat and braining someone.

"Guns are equalizers"

Only if both people have a gun, though. I suppose this could be an argument in favour of possession of guns, though I think it would be better if none had guns. Now I realise that criminals will still get guns (for example there has been an increase of 30% in criminal gun usage in the UK since the banning of handguns after Dunblane), however I theorize that a criminal is far more likely to use the firearm anyway, rather than the person he's committing a criminal act against.

I am actually not quite sure on which side I stand in this argument, as I can see good points both ways, unlike most posters who seem to be very polarized. I think that as long as access is controlled extremely strictly (no criminal record of any kind, no history of mental illness etc.), and as long as carrying a concealed (or any kind of weapon) in public areas remains illegal, I'd be fine with access to guns in the EU.

On another note, I think that the main reason between the vastly different murder rates (and don't say that a 900% difference isn't significant) between the US and the EU member states has more to do with the fact that in the US the gap between the rich and poor is far wider, and the lack of any kind of social welfare state means that the very poor have far higher chance to being drawn into illegal activities than in the EU.

	09-12-2001 02:29									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Mark L Drugs are still very much illegal in most European countries, especcially hard-drugs. So I'm not sure if the US' ban/war on drugs can clarify the 7 times higher homicide rates. Also, the numbers I just posted are from 1990 to 1999, during most of that time various European countries were very anti-drugs.

Agreed that the WOD can't be positively IDed as the culprit - any more than ownership of guns. I shouldn't even have attempted to bring it up. There might be some fundamental differences in the way the US handles drug law enforcement vs the way European nations handle same.

Speculation: When we say War on Drugs over here, we're not kidding around. I'm not sure how dedicated European nations are to eradicating this particular 'scurge'. Also, the USA has had Federal levels of law enforcement to add on top of state and local law enforcement for far longer than the EU has been around. Can you shed light on whether there were multi-national drug law enforcement efforts in place in Europe for the last 30 years?

Anyway, this issue ties back to the 7:1 homicide ratio which has proven to be rather a bit of a strawman vis-a-vis the thread topic, I think.

- Scipio

	09-12-2001 02:44									#89
	Got spare money?

I must say Wraith, you seem to be very knowledgable on the subject and you are providing a lot of good reasons for your side of the argument.

But the simple logistics of some of the things you say are not nearly as airtight as the stats being given by MarkL. If you are citing Switzerland as a place with next to no murders, but everyone has guns, than you fail to understand that it's a country where there is little armed forces, and the people serve as a militia. That is why they have guns. In America, that's not the point of owning a gun. We have a military to protect us. We have a police force and other organizations to protect us.

The great equalizer? How is it an equalizer if a criminal has one as well as the victim? You also fail to realize that, as the gun can be 'shown' to the aggressor to scare them into leaving, it can also be 'shown' BY the aggressor into making the victim do what he or she wants them to do. Armed robbery, sexual assault, etc. The positives of gun control seem to far weigh out the negatives, and I truly don't think you have any cause for concern about the government becoming corrupt and imprisoning you, etc. Besides, even if it is a republic, it's a democratic republic. So if you're going to go to jail, or if the government is going to come after you, it's going to be for a good reason. Anything else would be the exception to the rule.

	09-12-2001 03:47									#90
	Got spare money?

Plus let's not forget that Switzerland has the highest murder-rate in Europe. Well, the good parts. And no you can't have a link you bloody vultures, it's been posted enough times before.