I really hate people

**PJYelton** · 04-14-2005

first of all, violent crimes such as murder are actually several orders of magnitude higher in Britain, a country in which almost all guns are illegal, than in the US

Bull, any website will show you exactly the opposite, Britain has FAR lower murder rate than the US per capita.

You also have to look at the fact that guns are used in defensive purposes anywhere from 800,000 - 2,500,000 times a year to prevent crimes such as rape and murder.

Again, bull. Show me where you found those numbers.

EDIT: also, you are forgetting that murder is a per capita thing. You forgot to mention that the US has a population of 5 times that of Britain IIRC(Britain does have 60 mil?) and that we have alot more poorer people that there are in Europe.
Guns are not the problem, the heterogeniety of the US in respects to Race/Religion/Ethnicity is. Look at Switzerland and Finland, over there they are REQUIRED to own a weapon(in both countries, fully automatic weapons are legal), and they have some of the lowest crime rates of any industrialized nation. Is this because they have guns, no. This is because the ethnic mixture in most European countries is almost 100% of one ethnicity.

I've already stated that american culture is the true blame, but what I also said was that we can't cure our violent nature as long as guns remain apart of our identity.

Knives kill far more people in Britain that guns, so should they be required to ban knives, since criminals moved to them when they banned firearms?

Already been argued a few times above your post.

hmm.. propose me a way to phase out guns that does not lead to more crime(happened in every country that has banned them), including more murder and rapes, and I will be behind you 100%

Again, show me the studies that says murder rates have increased. And I'm sorry, but I'll take higher crime rates for a bit to drop the gun murder rate.

**sean** · 04-14-2005

Obviously you've never seen "Independance Day" then. Why would Hollywood lie about something like that?

I know you're being sarcastic - but think about who gets fired when the president enters Area 51.

**Govtcheez** · 04-14-2005

> Bull, any website will show you exactly the opposite, Britain has FAR lower murder rate than the US per capita.

What's cool about this is none of you guys arguing about numbers is posting a source.

**PJYelton** · 04-14-2005

LOL, yeah, I kind of avoided that because 99% of the sites out there that compare US to Britains murder rate are very pro or anti gun control and I didn't want to post something so biased either way

But for the record, here are two:

http://www.nationmaster.com/red/grap...mur_cap&int=-1

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/html/cjusew96/crpr.htm

**ober** · 04-14-2005

Originally Posted by PJYelton

And I'm sorry, but I'll take higher crime rates for a bit to drop the gun murder rate.

Seriously? That's brilliant.

**PJYelton** · 04-14-2005

I honestly don't see the problem with that. Obviously its best to have both lowered, but if I had to choose I would MUCH rather have a slightly higher crime rate and lower murder rate without guns than vice-versa.

**novacain** · 04-14-2005

>>propose me a way to phase out guns that does not lead to more crime(happened in every country that has banned them), including more murder and rapes, and I will be behind you 100%

I think you should look at Australia (not through the NRA dis-information though).

We banned most guns and placed restrictions on ownership. These include not being able to take your gun home from the shooting range and requiring all gun to be kept in a safe.

We had a drop in crime involving guns. Australia did have a rise in atempted murder (probably as without the high powered guns more victims were surviving).

"On a per capita basis this gives an annual firearm robbery rate in NSW of 10.1 incidents per 100,000 population and a handgun robbery rate of 6.8 incidents per 100,000 population.
....
For comparison, the rate of firearm robbery in the United States is 58.7 crimes per 100,000 population (Federal Bureau of Investigation 2000) ..."

http://www.ntu.edu.au/faculties/lba/...berties/12.htm

Do you realy think your right to a 'sporting activity' is worth the cost?

**nvoigt** · 04-14-2005

How about target shooting? Nothing dies there, and it's a legitimate sport. Hell, it's even in the Olympics.

How about allowing only the guns for olympic target shooting ? As far as I remember they were impractical for the normal guy and had to be reloaded for every shot. Just because the olympic teams can make it look like a walk in the park does not mean Joe J. Neighbour can kill his wife using one. Maybe pummeling her to death with it, but surely not by shooting her.

You take away our guns, you remove our right to protect ourselves from the government.

This is one of the inconsistent points. Back when this law was made, the government had guns. So the militia was allowed guns, too, as a means of control. Nowadays, the government has tanks and nuclear weapons. Either you allow tanks ( see my 1 bazillion posts above about that ) or you give up on your chance to topple your president should he ever do something really stupid ( I guess you already did that. Oops, nevermind, didn't say anything

)

You take away our guns, and you're going to take away food from millions every year.

This is the only valid reason I have read up to now.

And the rest of the world is having lawsuits brought against homeowners by burglars... and the burglars are winning. Your point?

Point is, you have to be alive to bring up a civil lawsuit. And if lawsuits were won by burglars that often, don't you think that burglar/lawyer teams would be far more popular ?

God forbid someone have something that has isn't used for something practical. Guess I'll have to throw away my XBox and dartboard and movies and pretty much 3/4 of what I own.

If 3/4 of what you own could kill people with a single click, I would argue against you owning it, no matter how much fun it is.

Fun by the way is very subjective. Some perverts define rape as "fun". If it's "fun" for some, it doesn't necessarily mean it's a benefit to the public. I don't doubt that shooting a gun is fun for some. I think driving a tank would be fun for some. But weighting the fun of people versus the public interest of not getting killed, fun doesn't really matter.

I'm asking again because I didn't really get an answer: where and why do Americans draw the line between risky but allowed weapons ( semi-auto ) and weapons that are forbidden ( tanks ) ? Can anyone define that line and list some reasons ?

**Govtcheez** · 04-15-2005

> Some perverts define rape as "fun". If it's "fun" for some, it doesn't necessarily mean it's a benefit to the public.

A person owning a gun that he only target shoots with isn't hurting anyone; this is a dishonest analogy.

I'd be interested to see a comparison of crimes per gun between the US and the UK or Europe. Obviously our gun crime rates are higher, but, as repeatedly pointed out, we have far more guns. I doubt it'd be possible to find reliable numbers on this, but I'll check tonight if I have time.

I'm asking again because I didn't really get an answer: where and why do Americans draw the line between risky but allowed weapons ( semi-auto ) and weapons that are forbidden ( tanks ) ? Can anyone define that line and list some reasons ?

I don't know of the reasons for sure (you'd have to ask a congressman), but like I said, the line is drawn where you said it is. Some semi-automatic weapons are allowed, and nothing over that is.

**Darkness** · 04-15-2005

I think I agree with govtcheez, we have more guns hence the higher gun related crime rate. Why do we have more guns? We have more money.

**Govtcheez** · 04-15-2005

> Why do we have more guns? We have more money

I just picture you sitting on a bridge with a fishing line, waiting for someone to jump up and grab the bait.

Also, we have more money because God loves us more than the dirty foreign devils.

**Darkness** · 04-15-2005

We are the united states...we are awesome. Almost as awesome as awesometown (which has more money and a higher crime rate than the USA).

So you see, crime rate is directly proportional to awesomeness. Can't believe you guys are so stoopid.

**joshdick** · 04-15-2005

In case you were waiting for me to respond to something, the first post I saw this morning had

Some perverts define rape as "fun".

in it, so I'm going to sit the rest of this thread out, I think. This thing's probably going to go Godwin any moment ...

**Govtcheez** · 04-15-2005

Originally Posted by Darkness

We are the united states...we are awesome. Almost as awesome as awesometown (which has more money and a higher crime rate than the USA).

So you see, crime rate is directly proportional to awesomeness. Can't believe you guys are so stoopid.

There is no crime in Awesometown. As the mayor and only resident, who would I commit crimes against?

edit: Thank you for replying to tell us you're not going to reply.

**Darkness** · 04-15-2005

I do think I am right about the money comment though.

EDIT:
me

Statistics show that roughly 50% percent of the population of awesometown is under persecution.

Thread: I really hate people

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Similar Threads

God

I'm worried about some of the people wanting to program...

February 1, 2019...

10 yrs from now

the us constitution