Show us your guns!

[sjewkestheloon]

oh dear looks like i'm part responsible for sending this post to shit. i still stand by what i said but was in a bad mood yesterday.

[pablo]

The only daft person here is probably you. And yes, having a culture that exposes people more to guns does lead to violence and such. What makes you think otherwise? Anyhow, why do you attack other countries then? What's the problem? Why? Isn't attacking another country because of fear of them having nuclear weapons in anyway related to your culture and attitude towards eachother? Isn't your moral and ethics linked with your culture?

Since you're saying that guns would make a person less likely to get robbed/whatever, the logic concludes that if everybody got a gun, crime would decrease, eventually coming to an end. Your first argument stated

So you're saying if you were a burglar, gun or no gun, you would burgle a homeowner who you know has a gun?

And that's exactly what I commented. Yes, "I" would. This rethoric of yours leads to the conclusion guns nullifies burglary. And yes, later you stated that it would just decrease, but at that point you had made no such argument.

I didn't attack any country. Stop acting like everyone in America has a hard on blow up other countries, which is somehow linked to our national identification with guns. You clearly have no fucking clue about American history or culture, so please, shut up before you make yourself look even more like a jackass.

First of all, George Bush attacked Iraq, not me or any one else on this board.

Second, our national link to firearms has to do with self defense and the fact that our country was built by fighting off an colonial force. Our country, unlike Sweden or any other country in the EU, is spread out. When our nation was founded guns were essential to survival. Regardless, our country was built as a loose federation of states, states that had their own civilian militaries, elsewise known as "militias" not unlike what Switzerland has.

Third, the second amendment was included in the constitution as a safeguard against an oppressive government. Guns are needed to exercise what Lincoln called our "revolutionary right" that is, the right to destroy a government that becomes too oppressive. All these things contribute to why guns are an integral part of America.

Finally, and most ludicrously, you're speaking in absolutes and in human behavior there are no absolutes. You took what I suggested in my original argument, that a burglar is less likely to burglarize a homeowner he knows owns a gun, and slapped a logical fallacy on to it (slippery slope) and proceeded to say that my logic led to it. The only thing leading to it is the flawed logic that you applied to my suggestion.

You elected your president. Maybe you personally didn't vote for him, but stop taking everything like a personal insult then. Something must have made alot of Americans vote for that man and I'm guessing it's a part of the culture and what many perceive as fear here in europe. What else could make it okay to bomb two countries?

I'm not arguing against what made America have it's current laws, I'm arguing against the fact that you seem to believe that more weapons should make the world safer. Everybody shouldn't be allowed to have a gun, and that I stand for. And I'm sorry if you feel that I took your logic to a faulty end, but that was, and is, my interpretion and should be viewed that way. What I meant all this time was that guns = more guns = more death and sorry if I can't express myself that well, english is my third language.

Plus the fact that I could believe in absolutes when it comes to human behaviour hasn't struck your mind? You're talking in absolutes when you say there are no absolutes, so whatever.

And please, read my post the noob, I don't bash on your country, but I guess my trying to understand it isn't met with joy or understanding. It's MY perspective, MY critical view and NO I don't say that your country is all bad and all that cliche critique. You just assume that. If you can't handle critique, what the hell is free speech all about then? What the hell is a discussion worth? I personally believe that america is a great country. albeit flawed.

[NTSC-J]

Pablo,

As an American, I would like to apologize on behalf of my fellow citizens posting here who are obviously insane. Guns = death. Lots of it. How anyone could see any sort of peace or safety looking down a barrel is nuts. The only reasons I've heard folks say that they want to own guns are:

1 - To protect themselves from burglars (which leads me to ask, Are you guys who subscribe to this logic fighting back looters and marauding hordes on a regular basis? If not, is this is all in preparation for the big night when someone does crawl through your window? Don't you think it would be easier and safer to just let them take your shit if it ever happened? Personally, if I ended up wasting a guy because he tried to run off with my breadbox, I'd be a bit disturbed. Or even worse, I could be the guy that died defending his breadbox, not really a legacy I'd like to leave behind.)

2- Because it's "our right". (I have never understood this reason. I could own a lawnmower too, but I don't. But I can you freedom hating bastards!)

And those seem to be the only reasons. Someone earlier said this has nothing to do with fear which is pretty fuckin dumb. I think piling up a personal armada in case your one-bedroom apartment is breached is a sign that maybe life is a little uncertain for you right now. America is all about fear, it's practically in the water (incidentally, lately there have been numerous heated debates on the additives in our water and much panic among the people).

America is a scary scary thing.

[chtimi-CLA]

lol at the pics of overarmed nerds in the woods
have a nice terrist season, savers of the West

[D]

I thought this thread would be about super guns.
We should form an army to battle for freedom of shoot 'em ups.

Everybody raise their right hand...............

[Neon]

"All the 'libs' will eventually become extinct thanks to abortion, AIDS from premarital sex, and not being able to defend themselves against someone with a gun"

- guy I work with

I was reading one of his gun magazines once while in the bathroom and it had an ad for a video called 'Explodin' Varmints' which chronicled the deaths of 500 squirrels/chipmunks/groundhogs/etc against high-caliber firearms. You couldn't pay me to watch it but damn what a title. Still LOL when I see that magazine.

Anyways, all you extremists need to get bent. Hunting is a perfectly legitimate reason to own a gun. But then maybe you haven't hit a deer head on going 55 mph like I have. I should post the pics of the car afterwards. That might change a few minds. Deer really should be extinct, they're useless and not even cute.

[Damocles]

@Damocles - I trust that is a Weatherby with a bull barrel, but no scope or iron sights??

Nope, it's actually a Remington 700 BR action with a Blackstar barrel. Of course, that's before it recieved a Leupold VX II. On a side note, I've found that the VX II's are actually superior to VX III's. We've found that they pick up light far better. It's amazing the number of people that come into the shop looking for II's and trying to trade in III's.

Funny....66 replies and only 3 of them actually contain pictures of personally owned guns.

I've been in enough debates about this issue to know that it leads nowhere. Everyone has their view, everyone thinks they're right, and no one will change. It's just that simple. Oh...did I forget about the name-calling part? Oops...I see we've already covered that in this thread.

[landshark]

1 - To protect themselves from burglars (which leads me to ask, Are you guys who subscribe to this logic fighting back looters and marauding hordes on a regular basis? If not, is this is all in preparation for the big night when someone does crawl through your window? Don't you think it would be easier and safer to just let them take your shit if it ever happened? Personally, if I ended up wasting a guy because he tried to run off with my breadbox, I'd be a bit disturbed. Or even worse, I could be the guy that died defending his breadbox, not really a legacy I'd like to leave behind.)

Heh, no hordes here. But some months ago (3 or 4) I was laying in bed early morning when my house alarm went off. Scared the shit out of me because it's the first time it's happened. I grabbed my pistol and retreived my shotgun. I made sure to make the distinct cocking sound to chamber a round. I cleared my house and found noone, but the backdoor was wide open. To this day I'm still not sure what caused it, but I'm pretty sure it's not the wind (we've been through alot of windstorms and it's never opened the backdoor). I'm very glad to have had my 'guns' that day.

"...safer to just let them take your shit?" Home invasions when the owners are present are rarely "peaceful". And many home invasions do not just result in the taking of stuff. Kidnappings are common. Rape is more common. Criminals are very opportunistic. If you happen to be there, you are likely to be attacked.

Also, I'll be damned if I'm gonna let someone take my stuff. I spend the first 25% of my life educating myself to get a job so I could make a living to buy stuff. Why should I let someone take it? I'd much rather see them splattered on the wall. I fucking hate thieves (really hate them). They live only to make other's lives hell. If everyone just sits there and lets intruders blindly rob them, this is going to become a VERY interesting country. Hell, I'll become a thief because it's going to be alot easier than working for a living.

And those seem to be the only reasons.

Forgot my main reason, for fun. My original reason for buying a gun when I turned 21 was because a friend and I enjoyed going to the range and shooting. This is still my primary reason. I've also found I like building them; similar to working on my car.

[sffan]

I just want to say that I am a 39-year-old American and I have never owned a gun or fired a gun in my life.

Well, BB guns don't count, do they?

[landshark]

@Damocles - I trust that is a Weatherby with a bull barrel, but no scope or iron sights??

Nope, it's actually a Remington 700 BR action with a Blackstar barrel. Of course, that's before it recieved a Leupold VX II. On a side note, I've found that the VX II's are actually superior to VX III's. We've found that they pick up light far better. It's amazing the number of people that come into the shop looking for II's and trying to trade in III's.

You guys have any good deals on scopes for fellow shmup members?

[Damocles]

@Damocles - I trust that is a Weatherby with a bull barrel, but no scope or iron sights??

Nope, it's actually a Remington 700 BR action with a Blackstar barrel. Of course, that's before it recieved a Leupold VX II. On a side note, I've found that the VX II's are actually superior to VX III's. We've found that they pick up light far better. It's amazing the number of people that come into the shop looking for II's and trying to trade in III's.

You guys have any good deals on scopes for fellow shmup members?

Hehe. I could probably send you our card. We're relatively small (well, myself and my father) and, though my view may be biased, we have damn good prices. Since it's just a scope, shipping wouldn't be a problem.

*shrug*

[professor ganson]

I just want to say that I am a 39-year-old American and I have never owned a gun or fired a gun in my life.

Well, BB guns don't count, do they?

Yep, same here, though I'm 36 atm.

I did shoot my tv set with a BB gun in my early teens. I was staying home sick, watching all those crap tv shows they would show in the daytime when I was a kid-- way before cable or satellite tv. I really don't know why I did it. I was probably pissed about having to watch such crap.

One of my professor friends owns guns, and I mostly respect his opinions-- though he is definitely too far to the right imo. It is a complex issue which I've given some pretty careful thought. My main concern is the existence/production/availability of so many guns that are not straightforward hunting rifles. I realize that some farmers need rifles, and there may even be a strong case in favor of the idea that some hunting is morally permissible-- I withhold judgment on that issue. But I think there is no good argument in support of hand guns, semi-automatic weapons, etc. I reject all the arguments I've heard in favor of the latter.

[Acid King]

You elected your president. Maybe you personally didn't vote for him, but stop taking everything like a personal insult then. Something must have made alot of Americans vote for that man and I'm guessing it's a part of the culture and what many perceive as fear here in europe. What else could make it okay to bomb two countries?

I'm not arguing against what made America have it's current laws, I'm arguing against the fact that you seem to believe that more weapons should make the world safer. Everybody shouldn't be allowed to have a gun, and that I stand for. And I'm sorry if you feel that I took your logic to a faulty end, but that was, and is, my interpretion and should be viewed that way. What I meant all this time was that guns = more guns = more death and sorry if I can't express myself that well, english is my third language.

Plus the fact that I could believe in absolutes when it comes to human behaviour hasn't struck your mind? You're talking in absolutes when you say there are no absolutes, so whatever.

There are plenty of reasons people voted for Bush. I didn't and I'd say the majority of Americans on this board didn't. Hell, I'm pro gun and anti war. The reason we attacked Iraq has to do with the current application of neoconservatism, an ideological movement that first arose in America in the 60's.

Where did I speak in absolutes? I never did. You implied it using a logical fallacy. A fallacy is a logical error meaning the logic you're using is not sound. You can't just say it's your "interpretation" of what I said because you're not applying valid logic.

I'd also point you to the fact that no social scientist worth his salt will use absolutes, it's all probabilities. They may speak in them, but what they really mean is "is more likely". When people say, for example, poverty causes crime, what their research really says is that if you grow up in poverty you are more likely to be a victim of crime/perpetrate a crime. It doesn't say every poor person is a criminal. When I wrote in my most recent research paper that marijuana laws don't deter use, I'm not saying that having marijuana illegal NEVER deters anyone from using it. I'ms aying the relationship between marijuana laws and actual use rates is insignificant.

You can believe in absolutes in human behavior, that's fine, but it's hard for you to justify that to someone that has done social research. You can believe that more guns = more death. I'm sure that there would be a pretty high correllation between the number of guns in the country (legal or illegal) and gun related crime rate, just as I'm sure the higher number of cars you have, the higher number of vehicular homicides you have.

I'd also direct you to this website http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap that places the United States 24th in per capita murder... however, Switzerland, a place where every household is issued an assault weapon due to their reliance on a civilian militia, is rated 56th.

[The n00b]

I can remember, at one time, being in favor of handgun control. It seemed such a simple issue: make it much harder for EVERYONE to get handguns.

Rose O'Donnel, a leader of the handgun control movement, was very outspoken and gave some powerful reasons for handgun control. Then the shit hit the fan... It was found out that O'Donnel's bodyguards had a freakin arsonel at their disposal. I was like "okay Rosie you'll give up your guns when everyone gives up their handguns, right? riiiiight?" Not so, naive gun control supporter. Rosie thinks its okay for guards to have guns because she's only protecting her kid and has no intention of EVER giving that up.

Thus the reason why America is not Europe when it comes to guns. Owning guns is a fundamental right protected by the American constitution. It's a right that most Americans don't want to give up, even gun control advocates. It comes down to everyone living by a seperate set of rules. The rich think only the rich should have guns, some think only criminals and the police should have guns, only hunters should have guns, and so on. So why not just leave it up to the people whether they want a gun or not? Makes sense to me.

BTW Pablo: you are still lording over another country's way of life. Surely your country is a paradise.

[pablo]

Where did I speak in absolutes? I never did. You implied it using a logical fallacy. A fallacy is a logical error meaning the logic you're using is not sound. You can't just say it's your "interpretation" of what I said because you're not applying valid logic.

I'd also point you to the fact that no social scientist worth his salt will use absolutes, it's all probabilities. They may speak in them, but what they really mean is "is more likely". When people say, for example, poverty causes crime, what their research really says is that if you grow up in poverty you are more likely to be a victim of crime/perpetrate a crime. It doesn't say every poor person is a criminal. When I wrote in my most recent research paper that marijuana laws don't deter use, I'm not saying that having marijuana illegal NEVER deters anyone from using it. I'ms aying the relationship between marijuana laws and actual use rates is insignificant.

You can believe in absolutes in human behavior, that's fine, but it's hard for you to justify that to someone that has done social research. You can believe that more guns = more death. I'm sure that there would be a pretty high correllation between the number of guns in the country (legal or illegal) and gun related crime rate, just as I'm sure the higher number of cars you have, the higher number of vehicular homicides you have.

I'd also direct you to this website http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap that places the United States 24th in per capita murder... however, Switzerland, a place where every household is issued an assault weapon due to their reliance on a civilian militia, is rated 56th.

Saying that there are no absolutes is an absolute. Like the only truth is that there is no truth. And no, I don't believe in absolutes, but I could have. Plus I can make my interpretation, you can't really validate my logic. I interpreted what you said as basically: "Do you really think anybody would rob somebody with a gun?" And I replied "Yes, because by that logic if everybody had a gun, no robberies would occur".

But you're right. I really didn't express myself that well..The point is though, how an increase in guns could be seen as both a cause and effect/symptome of the culture and ethics in a country. Seeing a gun in a relative's hand makes the threat very real. It stirs up a whole range of emotion which can produce fear and, I believe, most cases does. I can see how more guns can lead to a safety, but in every case but the more extreme, more available guns leads to more death. I'm not saying that weapons is the only cause, but it is both a cause and effect, a negative spiral of violence - caused by and resulting in fear - that's not going to get better with more guns, probably only worse.

According to wikipedia, I could only make out that members of the army in Switzerland must have a gun at home, which makes it about 400´000 out of 7´000´000. But sure enough, that is a high number. But there's where culture and ethics come in to place. Something must make them a "safer" country then, since they have a large amount of weapons in their homes and still doesn't keep up with Americas rate. What keeps them from feeling that they need to have these guns ready for defending themselves? According to wikipedia (not the best of sources, but reliable in some cases) missuse of the army-guns are very rare and most cases are suicide. They are also by law required to have the gun and ammo in seperate places, which can be a factor, but what keeps them contempt with having them in such a state, not being able to defend themselves with them?

And the noob, please read my posts before you state your opinion. Please. A little higher up I made this reply to a previous post of yours:

And the Noob, feel free to comment on my country, Sweden. I don't take it as an personal insult, both our countries believe in the right of free speech. I didn't say anything about Sweden, we have our own problems, but I don't believe that weapons would solve any of them. A case in point is the increase in robbery of money-transports here in Sweden (which are not armed with weapons). And the people in the transports are the ones protesting the idea of arming them since they don't want to get killed by the robbers using pre-emptive violence.

After that, I made another post, please look that up as well.

[The n00b]

Ah pablo I see you continue to ignore my posts as well. What does gun control in America have to do with Sweden? Will high gun sales in America somehow kill off the Swedish way of life?

I notice that instances of homosexuality have increased in Sweden, could this be the reason by Sweden's birthrate going down the drain? Maybe it's all the drugs you guys use but drug abuse is hardly unique to Sweden.

So why is Sweden's birthrate going down so much while America's keeps going up? Could it be that Sweden shows too much sex and thus by the time you guys finish with the tissues, you guys no longer feel like pleasing the ladies? I just don't see a reason why America should be more like Sweden. I'm sure you guys have a great country but it seems like we would just be trading our set of problems for Sweden's set of problems.

[system11]

This is very much a thread that's swallowed a bomb, and given the detonator to a monkey.

Did whoever started it not stop to consider it couldn't go /anywhere/ but into a guns debate?

[Acid King]

Saying that there are no absolutes is an absolute. Like the only truth is that there is no truth. And no, I don't believe in absolutes, but I could have. Plus I can make my interpretation, you can't really validate my logic. I interpreted what you said as basically: "Do you really think anybody would rob somebody with a gun?" And I replied "Yes, because by that logic if everybody had a gun, no robberies would occur".

But you're right. I really didn't express myself that well..The point is though, how an increase in guns could be seen as both a cause and effect/symptome of the culture and ethics in a country. Seeing a gun in a relative's hand makes the threat very real. It stirs up a whole range of emotion which can produce fear and, I believe, most cases does. I can see how more guns can lead to a safety, but in every case but the more extreme, more available guns leads to more death. I'm not saying that weapons is the only cause, but it is both a cause and effect, a negative spiral of violence - caused by and resulting in fear - that's not going to get better with more guns, probably only worse.

According to wikipedia, I could only make out that members of the army in Switzerland must have a gun at home, which makes it about 400´000 out of 7´000´000. But sure enough, that is a high number. But there's where culture and ethics come in to place. Something must make them a "safer" country then, since they have a large amount of weapons in their homes and still doesn't keep up with Americas rate. What keeps them from feeling that they need to have these guns ready for defending themselves? According to wikipedia (not the best of sources, but reliable in some cases) missuse of the army-guns are very rare and most cases are suicide. They are also by law required to have the gun and ammo in seperate places, which can be a factor, but what keeps them contempt with having them in such a state, not being able to defend themselves with them?

What you are engaging in in relation to absolutes is known as "tautology", something that's true by definition, which is, much like the your application of slippery slope, a logical fallacy. As for me validating your logic, you can ignore the fact that your logic is flawed all you want, the fact remains you're using logical fallacies. The only reason I brought up absolutes is your use of slippery slope and your insistence that your end "logically" flowed form my suggestion... which it doesn't.

Don't tell me "basically" what I said. What I said is what I meant. I never, nowhere claimed that owning a gun will absolutely deter crime in every instance. You're inferring that with faulty logic.My suggestion is that a burglar, armed or unarmed, is less likely to go for a victim who they know is armed. If a burglar had ten houses to choose from, 9 of them headed by Swiss men with assault rifles and 1 with an unarmed Swede, which do you think they'll go for? That's not to say they wouldn't attempt to burglarize one of the houses even if they knew all 10 houses were armed.

The fact is that it runs counter to your "more guns=more death" logic. Switzerland has the highest per capita gun ownership rate in the world. Aside from that, even as gun ownership is rising in America, crime rates are decreasing. Then again, in Switzerland, shooting is the national sport. They have shooting ranges all over the country. They have shooting festivals where little kids carry rifles around.

What keeps the the Swiss from thinking they have to keep the guns to defend themselves? Why do you think they have the guns? The whole purpsoe of giving them guns is for national defense, which, incidentally, is also the reason why the second amendment exists and what NTSC J happens to feel is bullshit. They may be "required by law" to keep them in separate places, but how do you think this is enforced? They reportedy have a tremendous problem with unregistered ammo because shooting ranges ignore the law that says all unregistered ammo purchased at firing ranges has to be used on the spot, I wouldn't be surprised if few people actually followed that law.

Any number of things could make the US more violent than Switzerland. Maybe it's because we have triple their poverty rate. Maybe we're just more violent. Regardless, you can't pin it on gun ownership alone, some theoretical "spiral of violence", fear (if gun ownership or the urge to defend one's home and country are signs of fear, Switzerland must be be filled with horrifically terrified people) or a "guns=more guns=more death" assertion.

And to end on a humorous note... a quote from Homer Simpson.
"A gun is not a weapon, it's a tool, like a hammer or a screwdriver or an alligator."

[dave4shmups]

Who said it would make all crimes disappear? No one did. Not all burglars are 100% logical and will enter into a dangerous situation regardless, however, it's stupid to think that the vast majority of criminals don't value their own life and that the threat of being shot or even having a gun pointed at them, wouldn't make them think twice, whether they're armed or not.

The logic you employed lead to that conclusion:

So you're saying if you were a burglar, gun or no gun, you would burgle a homeowner who you know has a gun?

If guns are the answer, then everybody should get a gun. Look at the statistics and figure out how more guns can equal less death. But I guess it's almost a part of the national identity of America. Pre-emptive strikes and whatnot. Don't let fear be the driving factor in a country.

I couldn't help but notice you like to lord over another country. So what magical kingdom do you come from that is perfect in all ways?

Have you ever stopped to notice that Canada, Europe, and other places with less guns have much lower violent crime rates then the United States does?? Cripes man, we have more people in prison then any other country in the world! So what good are all these guns doing us? Nothing!

And as far as the "Guns don't kill people; people kill people" argument goes, guns just make the whole process of killing that much easier and quicker. I don't think there are too many coroners who have typed "death by person" in this, or any other, country, on anyone's death cirtificate

The Swiss depend upon citizen gun ownership for their their national security policy; which is 100% based on defense, because Switzerland is a neutral country. That's why, at a touch of a button, every bridge leading into Switzerland can instantly be blown up, why they have air force bases inside of mountains, etc.

We, on the other hand, have the most powerful military in the world, so I hardly think that personal gun ownership matters at all, in terms of our national security.

[Acid King]

Have you ever stopped to notice that Canada, Europe, and other places with less guns have much lower violent crime rates then the United States does?? Cripes man, we have more people in prison then any other country in the world! So what good are all these guns doing us? Nothing!

And as far as the "Guns don't kill people; people kill people" argument goes, guns just make the whole process of killing that much easier and quicker. I don't think there are too many coroners who have typed "death by person" in this, or any other, country.

Random facts....

Over 80% of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 was due to drug convictions.

In 2002, drug law violators comprised 21.4% of all adults serving time in State prisons - 265,000 out of 1,237,500 State prison inmates.

Prisoners sentenced for drug offenses constituted the largest group of Federal inmates (55%) in 2003, down from 60% in 1995 (table 14). On September 30, 2003, the date of the latest available data in the Federal Justice Statistics Program, Federal prisons held 86,972 sentenced drug offenders, compared to 52,782 at yearend 1995.

So comparing gun ownership in the US towards gun ownership in Switzerland, is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

Not really. Our institution of the second amendment is based on the Swiss model of an armed civilian population. Regardless, the Swiss situation proves that a high rate of gun ownership in and of itself does not lead to increases in crime.

[dave4shmups]

1.) Those statistics only serve to prove the point that gun ownership does not reduce crime rates, and
2.) there is no mention anywhere of gun violence associated with those drug crimes-and plenty of drug crimes involve gun violence.

http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html

Quote from that article:

"If you have a country saturated with guns -- available to people when they are intoxicated, angry or depressed -- it's not unusual guns will be used more often,'' said Rebecca Peters, a Johns Hopkins University fellow specializing in gun violence."

More random facts, from page 950 of "The World's Most Dangerous Places", by Robert Young Pelton:

-"In 2000, 10,417 Americans were murdered with firearms-that's 28 every day."

-"In the twentieth century, more Americans were killed by guns in America than were killed by guns on foreign battlefields."

'nuff said on my part, I'm sick of aruging. I thought this thread was about "manly" guns, anyway!

[Acid King]

1.) Those statistics only serve to prove the point that gun ownership does not reduce crime rates, and
2.) there is no mention anywhere of gun violence associated with those drug crimes-and plenty of drug crimes involve gun violence.

http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html

Quote from that article:

"If you have a country saturated with guns -- available to people when they are intoxicated, angry or depressed -- it's not unusual guns will be used more often,'' said Rebecca Peters, a Johns Hopkins University fellow specializing in gun violence."

More random facts, from page 950 of "The World's Most Dangerous Places", by Robert Young Pelton:

-"In 2000, 10,417 Americans were murdered with firearms-that's 28 every day."

-"In the twentieth century, more Americans were killed by guns in America than were killed by guns on foreign battlefields."

'nuff said on my part, I'm sick of aruging. I thought this thread was about "manly" guns, anyway!

What statistics are you talking about? I brought up the drug statistics because you brought up the fact that we have so many people in jail and for some reason suggest that that somehow proves that guns don't deter crime. They are unrelated to the gun debate, I don't know how or why you crossed the two issues up. Our prison population shot up because of the war on drugs, and as I said before, crime rates are going down, gun ownership is going up. No matter what sensationalized bullshit you hear on the news, crime rates have been steadily falling for years.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm

"America's overall crime rates are similar to comparable nations. For the crime of assault, 2.2% of Americans are victimized each year, compared to 2.3% of Canadians and 2.8% of Australians. For car theft, the U.S. rate is 2.3%, Australia is at 2.7% and England is at 2.8%"

"America is extraordinary only in its rate of homicide with guns - lethal violence. "

"The system is so big because America punishes lesser offenses so frequently and so severely. Other nations reserve prison for serious or violent offenders. America sends millions of people to jail every year for minor crimes like trespassing, disorderly conduct, non-DWI traffic offenses, and simple possession of small amounts of illegal drugs for personal use."

"In the federal prison system, one in five prisoners is a "low-level drug law violator," defined as "non-violent offenders with minimal or no prior criminal history, whose offense did not involve sophisticated criminal activity and who otherwise did not present negative characteristics which would preclude consideration for sentence modification." The full federal tax burden of four average families is needed to for each such prisoner"

http://www.stopviolence.com/cj-knowledge.htm

[landshark]

-"In the twentieth century, more Americans were killed by guns in America than were killed by guns on foreign battlefields."

And even more by cars. Saying gun ownership drives crime down isn't a valid comparison because that specific statement cannot take into consideration the category of crimes.

There's some other factors I'd like to bring into this thread such as locality, upbringing, and a few other; but it would probably bring in a few more logs circling the bowl.

Wasn't this a picture thread?

I always liked the metal work on my Winchester 101. Not the most complex, but I like it.

[dave4shmups]

-"In the twentieth century, more Americans were killed by guns in America than were killed by guns on foreign battlefields."

And even more by cars. Saying gun ownership drives crime down isn't a valid comparison because that specific statement cannot take into consideration the category of crimes.

There's some other factors I'd like to bring into this thread such as locality, upbringing, and a few other; but it would probably bring in a few more logs circling the bowl.

Wasn't this a picture thread?

I always liked the metal work on my Winchester 101. Not the most complex, but I like it.

All good points guys. Nice metal work! Old Winchester's have a nice wild-west look to them!

At any rate, I respect the other opinions on guns, but I think we'd all be better off sticking to gun photos!

*rolls up sleeve and grabs digital camera* (kidding )

[pablo]

Ah pablo I see you continue to ignore my posts as well. What does gun control in America have to do with Sweden? Will high gun sales in America somehow kill off the Swedish way of life?

I notice that instances of homosexuality have increased in Sweden, could this be the reason by Sweden's birthrate going down the drain? Maybe it's all the drugs you guys use but drug abuse is hardly unique to Sweden.

So why is Sweden's birthrate going down so much while America's keeps going up? Could it be that Sweden shows too much sex and thus by the time you guys finish with the tissues, you guys no longer feel like pleasing the ladies? I just don't see a reason why America should be more like Sweden. I'm sure you guys have a great country but it seems like we would just be trading our set of problems for Sweden's set of problems.

What does America have to do to with the rest of the world? Well, America attacks other countries on loose foundation. In Iraq, no foundation at all, they didn't have any massdestruction weapons. What does anything that doesn't effect me direct have to do with me? Chaos-theory, or butterfly-theory, my dear friend. And understanding American culture maybe can lead one to understand why you feel it necessary to launch pre-emptive attacks. And weapons is a part of your culture, no? America has played worldpolice and will perhaps continue to do so as long as it can. That makes it my business since I live in "the world".

I have some ideas why birthrate are going down in Sweden. The unemployment rate is high and the high taxes on hiring people make a job very valuable for a woman here in Sweden, and most employers don't hire women in their late twenties-early thirties because they don't want to have to deal with them being home because of their baby. That makes women and men very careful about extending their family. A job is very valuable and hard to acquire for young people in Sweden today.

I don't see how you would change your way of life because of this forum and this silly little discussion. So get over yourself. I'm not saying you should be more like us, or a direct copy of us, I'm saying that sometimes one needs to step one step outside and look in. America could use a little of Swedens policy on guns in my mind, and Sweden could use a little of Americas view on work and economy. You can't just confine yourself to a little cage, exchanging ideas is beneficial for all parts.

Anyways, to end;

Korea, Vietnam, (Afghanistan,) Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq

[ArrogantBastard]

Pablo,

As an American, I would like to apologize on behalf of my fellow citizens posting here who are obviously insane. Guns = death. Lots of it. How anyone could see any sort of peace or safety looking down a barrel is nuts. The only reasons I've heard folks say that they want to own guns are:

1 - To protect themselves from burglars (which leads me to ask, Are you guys who subscribe to this logic fighting back looters and marauding hordes on a regular basis? If not, is this is all in preparation for the big night when someone does crawl through your window? Don't you think it would be easier and safer to just let them take your shit if it ever happened? Personally, if I ended up wasting a guy because he tried to run off with my breadbox, I'd be a bit disturbed. Or even worse, I could be the guy that died defending his breadbox, not really a legacy I'd like to leave behind.)

2- Because it's "our right". (I have never understood this reason. I could own a lawnmower too, but I don't. But I can you freedom hating bastards!)

And those seem to be the only reasons. Someone earlier said this has nothing to do with fear which is pretty fuckin dumb. I think piling up a personal armada in case your one-bedroom apartment is breached is a sign that maybe life is a little uncertain for you right now. America is all about fear, it's practically in the water (incidentally, lately there have been numerous heated debates on the additives in our water and much panic among the people).

America is a scary scary thing.

I agree with the majority of this. Everywhere I go, I can sense that people are living in fear. I see the way they look at other people. Someone's always suspecting someone of something. Why? Is it because they want to suspect? I think not. They're afraid for their safety. You see people walking and they'd occasionally glance back to see if there's anyone following them, because they're afraid of getting harmed or mugged. The possible circumstances and the probabilities of getting robbed / hurt / killed / raped are endless.

I'm by no means a Democrat, Republic, Liberal, Libertarian, or whatever the political parties, but I agree with some things to a certain extent by terms of whether we're taking things too far with certain things, and the media hyping up or broadcasting the latest headline story about a certain terror that has happened doesn't really help any but instill some fear in some Americans.

Guns being used for hunting is a whole another story itself as it is used to acquire some meat for your family.

I'm all for freedom, but sometimes I think we take advantage of it too much because the law and Constitution says we can.

P.S.: If you're going to flame me and call me an anti-gun faggot or whatever it is, I have a .22 rifle that I've owned since I was a kid (I haven't touched it in 10 years, and don't see the need to. I gave it to my dad for keepsake.) and I've taken a gun safety class. Especially Hunting Safety class, too.

I just don't give a shit about guns. Really.

[The n00b]

Ah pablo I see you continue to ignore my posts as well. What does gun control in America have to do with Sweden? Will high gun sales in America somehow kill off the Swedish way of life?

I notice that instances of homosexuality have increased in Sweden, could this be the reason by Sweden's birthrate going down the drain? Maybe it's all the drugs you guys use but drug abuse is hardly unique to Sweden.

So why is Sweden's birthrate going down so much while America's keeps going up? Could it be that Sweden shows too much sex and thus by the time you guys finish with the tissues, you guys no longer feel like pleasing the ladies? I just don't see a reason why America should be more like Sweden. I'm sure you guys have a great country but it seems like we would just be trading our set of problems for Sweden's set of problems.

What does America have to do to with the rest of the world? Well, America attacks other countries on loose foundation. In Iraq, no foundation at all, they didn't have any massdestruction weapons. What does anything that doesn't effect me direct have to do with me? Chaos-theory, or butterfly-theory, my dear friend. And understanding American culture maybe can lead one to understand why you feel it necessary to launch pre-emptive attacks. And weapons is a part of your culture, no? America has played worldpolice and will perhaps continue to do so as long as it can. That makes it my business since I live in "the world".

I have some ideas why birthrate are going down in Sweden. The unemployment rate is high and the high taxes on hiring people make a job very valuable for a woman here in Sweden, and most employers don't hire women in their late twenties-early thirties because they don't want to have to deal with them being home because of their baby. That makes women and men very careful about extending their family. A job is very valuable and hard to acquire for young people in Sweden today.

I don't see how you would change your way of life because of this forum and this silly little discussion. So get over yourself. I'm not saying you should be more like us, or a direct copy of us, I'm saying that sometimes one needs to step one step outside and look in. America could use a little of Swedens policy on guns in my mind, and Sweden could use a little of Americas view on work and economy. You can't just confine yourself to a little cage, exchanging ideas is beneficial for all parts.

Anyways, to end;

Korea, Vietnam, (Afghanistan,) Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq

Pablo you'd like us to believe you're a worldly european looking out for us, trying to show us a better way. Thanks now fuck off you idiot troll. You had a point right up until you mentioned Korea and Afghanistan in the same breath as Vietnam and Iraq. I doubt you know much about any of these wars, they just serve your purpose to bash another country.

Is there a climate of fear? For some people there is along with a climate of nativism. Of course looking at Australia, Britain and France, the U.S. could be a whole lot worse in those regards. There's also a climate of optimism and tenacity to change the country for the better. Something Sweden sorely lacks. A small and ever declining birthrate, high rates of drug abuse, and a government that seems to have no impetus to change. It's almost like your population has just given up. Maybe America is going to crap but it sure has a long way before it reaches Sweden's status of snobbery mixed with apathy. heh it's kind of like some half dead bum staring up at America and muttering "man I'm so cool because I never sold out, can you spare a dime for some weed dude?"

Of course I don't speak for every American. NTSC-J well he's got some problems but if that's the way he wants to live his life that's fine, I'd just rather he didn't speak for me and go mope in a dark room somewhere while listening to The Cure though.

BTW I voted independent this latest election. I chose to vote along my beliefs but so did other people and Bush came out ahead while the other half voted for his clone in the demo party. Not the way I would have done things but at least those guys cared enough to vote.

[landshark]

Korea, Vietnam, (Afghanistan,) Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq

You should pull the 2nd Afghanistan out of there. That was more than justified.

[neorichieb1971]

My 2 cents.

Being a Brit in the USA I can make a few comparisons.



In England where I come from guns are outlawed completely. Yet petty crime was through the roof when I left in 2000. I was burgled twice and had numerous vehicles stolen. On one occurance someone just stole my stereo system out of my car causing me a 100 quid replacement window bill.

When I arrived in the States I found it ok to leave my car unlocked, my house was commonly left unlocked and I felt safer generally speaking.


So what I say is that although guns are lawfully accepted in the USA, the people that live here in the USA are generally law abiding citizens that all work towards good. Sure for every 1000 guns sold about 5 will go into the wrong hands eventually. Some people may die as a result. But overall my opinion is that it is the majority of people in the USA are good law abiding citizens that require no deterrants.


My only gripe with USA law is that constitutional laws were written over 100 years ago. The reason why other countries have no constitution is because they change with the times. The people that wrote the constitutional laws are now dead, they lived by those laws in their time. Let Americans of today make laws for the time they live in.

Makes sense doesn't it?

[Icecap Veiwin]