I don't think the problem is education or that the masses fear fire arms. The problem is, how do you reach people like those not to do the shit they did?
Gun Control
- Thread starter Throatpunch
- Start date
Einhanderc7
Vat dipped, grown and still oozing with perfection
Human nature, its a many spending and horrid thing. The issue is not reaching them, the issue is effectively combating them.
Antiwarprofallout
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Thank you, now I can show you this.
http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content...d-crime-for-the-Australian-Parliament-Rev.pdf
GonZo_626
Well Shit!
Well for my first post I will wade into this argument as I am a fan of discussing this.
Gun Control both good and bad
Most people look at this topic and think guns are bad, well a firearm is a inanimate object that on its own and unless their is a malfunction do nothing but sit there. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I can defend that with the toast argument, bread doesn't toast on its own, it requires a toaster. People will always kill people, and instead of looking at gun death or gun crime stats look into violent crime and you will find that:
1 - Most countries that have gun control to a massive amount have seen a spike in violent crime after the guns were banned due to criminals not needing to be worried as much, and then the historic trend reasserts itself and continues to go down
2 - The amount of gun crime in the USA has been going down for around 40 - 50 years
3 - Counties with heavy gun control and a ton of less fortunate people still have tons of gun crime (Brazil, Mexico)
4 - The Switzerland argument, well these people are all trained to use the rifles they have a home
5 - Most mass shootings are carried out by people that have mental problems
6 - If criminals want guns they still get them somehow (there are some really nice homemade firearms in Brazil seized by the corrupt police forces)
So in essence Gun Control only works a little and is an easy scapegoat for a politician to use to earn some political points with those that won't do real research (most of population of the world).
But I do support licensing and safe storage, but banning all guns will solve nothing (sorry Australia and some Europeans) as if people want to kill they will find a way weather it is guns, bug trucks, knives, IED's, or whatever wacky ass way somebody wants to kill, or harm someone.
If you really want to stop crime (not just guns, or violent, all most crime) mostly better mental health care, allowing abortion, and reducing poverty will do the best. But these cost money and take time, they wont be so good as the many soundbites you get from clueless politicians using made up terms like "assault weapon" because its a black rifle.
I live in Canada were I think some of our Gun Control makes no sense. My AR-15 (yes I have one, and no, its not scary) is classed as restricted meaning I have to have a special license and a range membership to own it. As well as travel conditions, only allowed to use at the range, me giving up the cops needing a warrant to search my house, and a criminal record check everyday and extra storage requirements. Meanwhile there are plenty of .223 semi-auto rifles around that are non-restricted. An AR is no different besides having better ergonomics and ease for accessories. People bring up firing rate and mag limits, I bring up the British Mad Minute, where a British solider could shoot 60 rounds in 60 seconds somewhat aimed with a bolt action rifle that held 10 rounds (yes I have a Lee-enfield too) with a .303 round (bigger with more power). My AR is semi and is mechanically limited to 45 rounds a minute, and there are many youtube videos showing how stupid mag limits are, first a pinned mag is modable in 10 seconds so pretty useless as those that want to commit a crime with it will remove it anyway. Also the difference in timing for someone using six 5 round mags to 1 30 round mag is like 2 seconds.
Plus the NRA in the USA is not against gun control, they are only against the stupid ass gun control that the democrats want in. You know why the fought the last fight against licensing? Because a parent would no longer be able to "borrow" a firearm to their own child while supervising them. So in other words you could not take your own children hunting or to the range unless they had a license that was required to "borrow" said firearm. Gun licensing that makes sense without pushing for full registration of every firearm probably would be in place except for stupid clauses and would help them solve a few problems they have with the 3 day record checks that don't get completed (criminal record check already completed) by law enforcement as they don't have the time.
Gun Control both good and bad
Most people look at this topic and think guns are bad, well a firearm is a inanimate object that on its own and unless their is a malfunction do nothing but sit there. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I can defend that with the toast argument, bread doesn't toast on its own, it requires a toaster. People will always kill people, and instead of looking at gun death or gun crime stats look into violent crime and you will find that:
1 - Most countries that have gun control to a massive amount have seen a spike in violent crime after the guns were banned due to criminals not needing to be worried as much, and then the historic trend reasserts itself and continues to go down
2 - The amount of gun crime in the USA has been going down for around 40 - 50 years
3 - Counties with heavy gun control and a ton of less fortunate people still have tons of gun crime (Brazil, Mexico)
4 - The Switzerland argument, well these people are all trained to use the rifles they have a home
5 - Most mass shootings are carried out by people that have mental problems
6 - If criminals want guns they still get them somehow (there are some really nice homemade firearms in Brazil seized by the corrupt police forces)
So in essence Gun Control only works a little and is an easy scapegoat for a politician to use to earn some political points with those that won't do real research (most of population of the world).
But I do support licensing and safe storage, but banning all guns will solve nothing (sorry Australia and some Europeans) as if people want to kill they will find a way weather it is guns, bug trucks, knives, IED's, or whatever wacky ass way somebody wants to kill, or harm someone.
If you really want to stop crime (not just guns, or violent, all most crime) mostly better mental health care, allowing abortion, and reducing poverty will do the best. But these cost money and take time, they wont be so good as the many soundbites you get from clueless politicians using made up terms like "assault weapon" because its a black rifle.
I live in Canada were I think some of our Gun Control makes no sense. My AR-15 (yes I have one, and no, its not scary) is classed as restricted meaning I have to have a special license and a range membership to own it. As well as travel conditions, only allowed to use at the range, me giving up the cops needing a warrant to search my house, and a criminal record check everyday and extra storage requirements. Meanwhile there are plenty of .223 semi-auto rifles around that are non-restricted. An AR is no different besides having better ergonomics and ease for accessories. People bring up firing rate and mag limits, I bring up the British Mad Minute, where a British solider could shoot 60 rounds in 60 seconds somewhat aimed with a bolt action rifle that held 10 rounds (yes I have a Lee-enfield too) with a .303 round (bigger with more power). My AR is semi and is mechanically limited to 45 rounds a minute, and there are many youtube videos showing how stupid mag limits are, first a pinned mag is modable in 10 seconds so pretty useless as those that want to commit a crime with it will remove it anyway. Also the difference in timing for someone using six 5 round mags to 1 30 round mag is like 2 seconds.
Plus the NRA in the USA is not against gun control, they are only against the stupid ass gun control that the democrats want in. You know why the fought the last fight against licensing? Because a parent would no longer be able to "borrow" a firearm to their own child while supervising them. So in other words you could not take your own children hunting or to the range unless they had a license that was required to "borrow" said firearm. Gun licensing that makes sense without pushing for full registration of every firearm probably would be in place except for stupid clauses and would help them solve a few problems they have with the 3 day record checks that don't get completed (criminal record check already completed) by law enforcement as they don't have the time.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
This misses the point entirely...
I would hazard the guess that an overwhelming majority of those who commit petty violent crimes [shoot people for wallets or cutting line in McDonalds], haven't the slightest idea how to make a slingshot, much less a zip gun; and far less even a derringer. The point was ~the professionals; you mentioned them yourself. Ban guns, and you'll make an underground market fed by gunsmiths.
Within days of prohibition's enactment, private stills were up and running. There are enough people with the understanding of how to machine ~or hand craft a firearm... and many of them like money.
**One and all should read AE van Vogt's "The Weapon Shops of Isher"; the book is but a centimeter thick.
Last edited:
GonZo_626
Well Shit!
Totally agree that guns will be made. Let me loose in home depot and i will make you some flintlock rifles/pistols and black powder to go with it. And that isnt even dangerous compared to the stuff i can make out of a grocery store cleaning aisle or god forbid you let me loose with some camping supplies. Heck you can make a ied with flour, compressed air, and a lighter that could collapse and open building.
Guys, no one is saying that guns and weapons should be removed phobition style ... at least I don't think anyone here seriously said that all kinds of weapons should be removed. Something like that would be ridiculous. Citizens should have the right to own and operate guns. At least that is my opinion. Point is, that when you compare the US and their gun viollence, they DO kinda stick out to almost any European nation in comparision.
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
1. Australia, Japan, UK, most nations in Europe with stricter gun laws then US?
2. Not so sure about that. The definitions of "gun crime" may also change giving a skewed image.
3. I don't think either Brazil or Mexico have the means with which to properly enforce gun control, or any control.
4. Switzerland has a pretty wide military service and they keep their service weapon at home. However ammo is heavily regulated and many are handing in their reservist rifles to the state. There has been some pretty big mass shootings committed with these reservist weapons and even referendums over whether the practice of keeping weapons at home should be continued or not. In the last referendum the "yes let's keep the guns home" side won but only by a small margin.
5. Could be true. However in US the Republicans, the party most on the side of NRA, isn't in favour of putting more money into public health care, including mental health.
6. Well let them go through that trouble then. Not that easy to make a home made AK that's as reliable.
Switzerland is a rich country with a large social support system. Those with less money can still live a proper life. They are racially rather homogeneous and have significant social control within their communities due to being fairly small and densely populated. People notice when stuff starts going wrong or when it is suspect. Action is taken. There are no large communities which are underprivileged. There are (mostly) no large concentrations of underprivileged people in single places and no ghettos. Police does a fairly good job at keeping organized crime at bay (at least violent crime).
Australia on the other hand has large underprivileged population groups with much alcohol abuse, vandalism and general crime. The country is friggin' huge and hard to control. Police are struggling both with the petty crime, smuggling and organized crime. Australia is the poster child of how easy it is to build submachine guns. Every few months, large amounts of garage built submachine guns surface in police busts.
Belgium is a rather good example of how inexperience or fear of firearms ruins the shooting community.
Decades ago, the older generation of sport shooters and hunters decided that after the last gun law reform, they would keep to themselves. They would hunt and compete in silence. There was no community outreach to increase shooting interest or educate the general populace. Novices had to take the necessary steps themselves to enter the shooting community. Needless to say, the influx of new shooters was fairly low.
As time passed, the firearms enthousiasts figured they'd be left alone. But alas, the left wing politicians (unhindered by the right wing btw) started campaigns for stricter gun laws. As is to be expected the next incident (with a mentally ill fucktard) was used to enact an emotional knee jerk tightening of firearms laws. It happened again, and again, and again.
The public believed every fear mongering thing the media & politicians told them, some examples:
- Caliber 5.7x28 is banned by name because they are cop killer bullets which penetrate 20 bulletproof vests with a single shot. Real explanation: the P90 is rated for NATO standards which require penetration of 20 layers of kevlar and a light aluminium backplate at a given distance. The press & politicians were more than happy to make their own little story out of it. 5.7x28 is illegal for being too dangerous, but any intermediate cartridge is more potent than that? Those things are legal...
- Weapon mounted laser pointers are illegal on firearms because they remove the need to aim. (haha)
- Magazine capacity for centerfire rifles are now restricted to 30 rounds. The only effect this has is that historical weapons such as the PPsh or Sites Spectre now have to be defaced to pin the magazine capacity. If you're a criminal, it's not like it's hard to remove the mag cap restriction or combine 2 20 round mags into a 45 round mags (yes, that is a thing that you can do rather easily).
- Anti-gun governors (governors approve firearms permits here) banned the AK / Kalashnikov rifles due to being too dangerous, but had absolutely no qualms with approve FN FAL permits. Do I need to tell you how much more powerful and armor piercing an FN FAL is and how much easier it is to convert to full auto it is?
A barrel shroud is a safety feature to prevent yourself from getting burnt on a hot part of the gun...
That's why it's important for the population to be educated. Democracy requires an educated population to function properly. The politicians lying to us ought to be confronted and reprimanded. If necessary voted out.
Ammo is so heavily restricted that you can walk into a gun range or gun store and walk out with it.
Anti-gun people keep saying that Switzerland doesn't allow storage of munition at home and other such lies. The government decided not to provide ammo for the soldier to store at home (which was common for decades before). This in no way restricts the soldier or militiaman from buying his own ammo (which is common).
As for people storing their rifle at the armory, of course that's common. And someone already posted an article refuting your point on that.
Of course you'll always have conscripts which are not interested in guns and don't want the hassle of storing it at home...
Funny. There's a guy who documented his manufacturing an AK receiver from a shovel and mounting his own non-standard improvised barrel assembly.
He made a reliable AK receiver from A SHOVEL IN HIS GARAGE.
How many more times do I have to point out that improvised weaponry is EASY to make. Especially if effective range is below 25 meters (which is common crime range).
We have 3D printed single shot guns, we have tubing made shotguns, we have shovels turned into AK receivers, we have Home Depot made submachine guns.
See, this is the problem we run into when discussing gun legislation. Absolutely no respect for truth and facts if they do not allign with the person's opinion or agenda.
valcik
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
There's already some confusion caused by EU directive amendment from 2015 in Czech Republic. Since we have explicit rules how to deactivate a gun according to the new rules now, including step-by-step instruction based on your average semi-auto gun mechanism and written by some genius, Czechs cannot deactivate any gun with different mechanism than the one described in EU directive. As a result, there's a lot of fully working decommissioned weapons waiting for deactivation in Czech Republic, since the present legislative doesn't allow the Czech authorities to do anything without breaking the retarded rule.
Also, this incredibly smart amendment written by EU genius (sitting in the Brussels with 10.000€ monthly wage) didn't change shit. As we all know, the gun participating in terrorist attack in Paris, November 13, was ex-Yugoslavian Kalashnikov smuggled into EU. Yes, smuggling any gun into EU is not any problem for aspiring terrorist, especially if you have hundreds of thousands migrants flowing through the borders without any security screening. Yes, the same migrants allowed to flow freely by the same folks proposing stricter gun regulations. The irony!
Also, this incredibly smart amendment written by EU genius (sitting in the Brussels with 10.000€ monthly wage) didn't change shit. As we all know, the gun participating in terrorist attack in Paris, November 13, was ex-Yugoslavian Kalashnikov smuggled into EU. Yes, smuggling any gun into EU is not any problem for aspiring terrorist, especially if you have hundreds of thousands migrants flowing through the borders without any security screening. Yes, the same migrants allowed to flow freely by the same folks proposing stricter gun regulations. The irony!
However, the people I am talking about, are very often white young males which don't necessarily come from the poorest part of America. And it is very similar to Germany as well, if you're looking at those that chose to take a gun and kill several people randomly. Again, I am not blaming this on guns nor do I think banning them will solve the issue. Gun related crime and viollence has very often a reason that is much easier to explain then people runing amok.
Yes, absolutely, but that goes into all directions. I don't think the US has the problem that they will see some nationwide bann on all weapons anytime soon. What you describe is more or less an unique problem to Europe, because we have nothing here that is even close to the NRA and as far as I know no European constitution has weapons as a part of it.
There is a difference in the perception of weapons in general between the average European and the average American.
You can see it by the reaction of people to guns in the hand of 10 year olds.
Something like this in Germany? No way. Not even if we had more gun owners and less strict laws.
I am curious, why don't we teach kidz to drive cars at the age of 10? Or how to responsibly drink? But some feel weapons are not a problem. They are just a tool like any other I guess.
Kinda strange to see parents flipping out when their child might have seen just a glimpes of a nipple, but have no problem that it is owning and naming it's own rifle in a pink colour that it can barely hold by it self ...
What I often see, is that weapons are definetly treated as something that's special - aka DON'T TAKE MY GUNS! MAH FREEDOM! - , but at the same time they are also described like everything else - aka CARS KILL PEOPLE TOO! Argument.
Last edited:
Illuminati Confirmed!
Banned
So at least you're admitting that it's not about the guns and that banning them would therefore be useless. Great first step.
You're mixing causes and consequences here, police are less likely to be brutal in Australia and Switzerland because they have a lot less violent criminals resisting arrest.
http://www.colorofcrime.com/
This might clear up a lot of misconceptions you have about crime and punishment in the US of A.
Still, 6 and 10 year old children owning and operating their own guns and embrassing the gun culture is, in my opinion, questionable.
I am pretty sure, if we allowed children to own and operate cars at the age of 10, we could find that one, or even many children, which use them in a very responsible way. But still, no one would get the idea, it would be a good decision to leave it to them and their parents alone. Because even as inanimate objects, cars are well, cars and not soft ice or tooth brushes.
Hence why you don't see a lot of people here feeling OKish with 10 year olds owning and shooting their own weapons, just as how no one want's to see 10 year old children with driver licences and their own cars.
In the US, however guns are such an integral part of their culture - depending on the state, they are treated like a commodity, even though they clearly aren't. Without the intention to judge guns as either positive or negative. It's just stating a fact. Which is something that even gun owners will have to admit, because the constitution doesn't explicitly name cars (transportation), or hammers or no clue furniture as a right to own, but weapons.
You obviously can see them as a hobby like any other and treat it as sport, which is fine! Weapon collectors, competitive shooters, hunters, hell even people that just love to shoot at empty bear cans are fine for me. But weapons are still not ONLY a simple tool, no matter how many civilians use them. Because every tool has an inherent design princple that stands behind it and with weapons it is to either defend your self or to succesfull attack someone. I won't even say that the ONLY purpose of guns is to kill, but I think a soldier definetly welcomes a rifle that well, can get that job done efficiently if needed. No one can tell me that a machinegun or assault rifle has no value for the military. You can spend all of your life to use a sword ONLY for competitions, but that still doesn't change the fact what the inherent design principle behind a sword is.
I mean, you're not defending your self with a car or a splitting axe usually. Your first choice would be a weapon, if available! And that for a reason.
Weapons are called weapons, because well they are effective for a certain purpose, and tools well are made with a different use in mind. But you can't even agree with some gun owners on that. Without the intention to judge any of it!
And the founding fathers recognized the importance of weapons in the hands of militas. - Which I think is already represented by the National Guard and the state defence force, but that's just my opinion and not really important. As I said don't have a problem with people owning weapons of various kind, even if the only reason to own them is to protect their constitution, I say if they want them, give it to them. And I do not judge weapons as evil objects, just because a large motivation between weapon design is to have effective tools for defence and offense. Something has to fill that rolle too.
What I am talking about is a totall difference in how people grow up and see weapons. I am not a friend of exzessive gun laws and weapon regulation nor do I share that fear they create in the media. But no one who is sane, can denny that the culture around it, can lead to issues in some cases. But not even THAT, can be really mentioned or talked about in the US ...
I am pretty sure, if we allowed children to own and operate cars at the age of 10, we could find that one, or even many children, which use them in a very responsible way. But still, no one would get the idea, it would be a good decision to leave it to them and their parents alone. Because even as inanimate objects, cars are well, cars and not soft ice or tooth brushes.
Hence why you don't see a lot of people here feeling OKish with 10 year olds owning and shooting their own weapons, just as how no one want's to see 10 year old children with driver licences and their own cars.
In the US, however guns are such an integral part of their culture - depending on the state, they are treated like a commodity, even though they clearly aren't. Without the intention to judge guns as either positive or negative. It's just stating a fact. Which is something that even gun owners will have to admit, because the constitution doesn't explicitly name cars (transportation), or hammers or no clue furniture as a right to own, but weapons.
You obviously can see them as a hobby like any other and treat it as sport, which is fine! Weapon collectors, competitive shooters, hunters, hell even people that just love to shoot at empty bear cans are fine for me. But weapons are still not ONLY a simple tool, no matter how many civilians use them. Because every tool has an inherent design princple that stands behind it and with weapons it is to either defend your self or to succesfull attack someone. I won't even say that the ONLY purpose of guns is to kill, but I think a soldier definetly welcomes a rifle that well, can get that job done efficiently if needed. No one can tell me that a machinegun or assault rifle has no value for the military. You can spend all of your life to use a sword ONLY for competitions, but that still doesn't change the fact what the inherent design principle behind a sword is.
I mean, you're not defending your self with a car or a splitting axe usually. Your first choice would be a weapon, if available! And that for a reason.
Weapons are called weapons, because well they are effective for a certain purpose, and tools well are made with a different use in mind. But you can't even agree with some gun owners on that. Without the intention to judge any of it!
And the founding fathers recognized the importance of weapons in the hands of militas. - Which I think is already represented by the National Guard and the state defence force, but that's just my opinion and not really important. As I said don't have a problem with people owning weapons of various kind, even if the only reason to own them is to protect their constitution, I say if they want them, give it to them. And I do not judge weapons as evil objects, just because a large motivation between weapon design is to have effective tools for defence and offense. Something has to fill that rolle too.
What I am talking about is a totall difference in how people grow up and see weapons. I am not a friend of exzessive gun laws and weapon regulation nor do I share that fear they create in the media. But no one who is sane, can denny that the culture around it, can lead to issues in some cases. But not even THAT, can be really mentioned or talked about in the US ...
But you surely realize that spree killers are only a small factor in gun crime?
It might be extremely public and emotional, but sadly they account for only a small percentage of gun crime. They are generally also the hardest to prevent because we are unable to devise a system to catch these people before the act. Even in countries where psychological testing is necessary before gun permits are issued, these things happen.
Banning guns because of spree killers is punishing millions for the transgressions of a few. Luckily most countries recognise that that is not a fair thing to do.
Well, if I had children, I'd want them educated in firearms handling. If they know they get to handle guns when they want to and under supervision, they are less likely to sneak around and try to break into the safe on their own to be able to mess around with the cool unobtainable toys hidden within. (And don't fool yourself, many kids will observe you and eventually figure out how to open the safe regardless of how good your intentions are)
Since american society is riddled with guns, it's also smart to teach kids not to mess with firearms they find, but also allow them to see the difference between a toy and a real gun. Teach them how to safely unload a firearm.
All these things are now illegal in Belgium.
A side effect of this is that countries like Belgium, which were previously quite successfull at the (Olympic and other) shooting disciplines are now declining. Firearms usage is only possible as of 16 years old (ownership from 18 y.o.). This means they are already way behind the curve when it comes to sportshooting. It's very hard to make up for that. The results are obvious. It's sad to have to view this happen. Our rich shooting culture is disappearing, and for what?
Cimmerian Nights
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Dude, you have a quite a knack for conflating outliers like that into something bigger than they are. I don't know what your experience in America has been if any, but it's hard to put any weight in your pronouncements about gun culture when it seems like it's all based on click-baity youtube clips.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
A long time ago, I remember watching a news interview of a Police captain, showing off a desk full of confiscated semi-automatic weapons. He then picked up a silencer, and screwed it on to an uzi from the desk... he then explained that the silencer is real, the uzi is a toy; and said that this is what they are having to deal with in the street. They can't tell what's real from toys. It's changed quite a bit now, but even so... the only obvious clue on some toys, is the mandatory orange plastic ring on the tip of the barrel.
Yes! Absolutely.
But is 6 years really the age to own your own fire arm? Or 10? Do you share the same attitude with cars? Or beauty competition? If not, why not? - serious question!
I know this sounds ridiculous, and I understand this is a bit of a woolly argument from my side. But the point isn't even education. You can educate children in many ways and about a lot of things without them really interacting with it, like drugs, pregnancy, sex, cars you name it. And I do not even mind a 10 or 12 year old who's shooting a weapon at a gun range. However, you have to draw a line at some point, even if it seems arbitrary in some cases. We are doing it with almost everything else, be it from tools, to drugs. Why is it such huge problem with guns?
Point is, the way how we celeberate a cretain culture can have many effects which can still cause damage, even we don't see them directly on an individual level. Like mass shootings in combination with gun culture, or excessive beauty competitions coming from the obsession with beauty.
Are we talking about the US or European Nations? Like Belgium or Germany. We have to make a distinction here. I am with you on Germany and Belgium, we have not even nearlly the same rate like the US when it comes to gun violence. Be it by mass shootings or with criminals. So, more and stricter gun laws won't change a thing here. Particularly as with Germany, they are already very strict.
However, when we talk about mass shootings there is something that makes the US unique. But, you can't even really talk about it, this is what I am trying to say. Nothing more, nothing else. You can't even get a rational discussion going. And I think the gun lobby is the one who's having the larger political influence here and acting with a political agenda, as I think you can't really blame a father who lost his child for being emotional. But that just by the way. I am just saying people which are terriefied and emotional about mass shootings aren't necessarily out there because they want to abbolish the american constitution and to support now a tyranical regime and police state.
No clue how accurate their informations are, but if you can trust them, it clearly shows that the US has a problem with mass shootings. But even saying just that, makes the gun nuts crazy. They kinda remind me to the feminists in many ways.
Yeah they do, but that shouldn't stop anyone from asking the question, if there is a way to improve the situation. I think pretty much everyone understands that this is a very complex situation and that you can not make them all stop just like that.
Yes, there are a lot of bullshit laws, which I like about Skallagrim when he talks about how often certain objects are banned simply because of their name or intimade look, rather then the fact if they are actually dangerous or common in crimes and such. One of his videos shows him strolling around a home improvement center and tacking random objects to combine them in to items which are ( I think? ) banned in the UK, like shurikens or nunchakus or something like that.
Click baity youtube links? Let us not argue on this level ok? Either come up with an argument, or just leave it be. I already said that this was more to get a certain point across. Not that this would be in any way shape or form the standard among all weapon owners or in the US as a whole.
Are there or are there not children in the US owning weapons? Nowhere have I said that children owning guns is the cause of mass shootings. We are talking about a highly complex issue here. But the problem is that you can't even get the gun community in the US to actually recognize the uniqueness of the problem. It's not cancer or a world war, we get that. But that still doesn't mean the gun community should act like the NRA does or like the issue is "something you have to deal with". I think it is not hard to understand why this is very unsatisfying as answer for people.
Last edited:
TheGM
The voice of reason
Oh god it's that bullshit vox video.
Throatpunch
Banned
OK then, you have killed me dead with your knowledge, I'll concede to you on that one. And I know what a STEN gun is, yes.
Moving on, lets have a look at countries homicide rates that have tight gun laws and compare them with America's.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/France/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/France/United-Kingdom/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Germany/United-States/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Italy/United-States/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Spain/United-States/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/France/United-Kingdom/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Germany/United-States/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Italy/United-States/Crime
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Spain/United-States/Crime
I think the argument of "America has higher homicide rates because its bigger not because of the guns" is untrue in many other countries cases.
Lets have a look at India compared to the USA:
The Indian government has a monopoly on guns, and controls them strictly. India has a population that is around quadruple that of the USA.
- In India, the homicide rate is 2.8.
- In the USA it's 5.
- In India the intentional homicide rate is 2.8, in the USA its 4.7, 68% more than India.
- In China, the murder rate per million people is 10.02, compared to the USA at 42.01.
- In addition the homicide rate is 1.12, and the US's is 4.7
Last edited:
Why is it bullshit?