Kawasaki Concours Forum
Mish mash => Open Forum => Topic started by: Steve in Sunny Fla on January 20, 2015, 11:56:20 AM
-
watch this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBtWosxIqJE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBtWosxIqJE)
Steve
-
then watch this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrxjYfl05ek (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrxjYfl05ek)
Steve
-
I can't see any reason honor students in America shouldn't be required to do the same thing with an M16.
-
I'm always amazed at people's fascination for killing machinery like guns and rifles.
It's more likely to be killed by a toddler with a gun than a terrorist in the US. :o
Why on earth would you need (or even want) to own a device that is designed for the sole purpose of making another human dead? As soon as countries allow civilians to own rifles, people die. We know this to be true:P
Does "it feels really awesome" justify that?
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
-
I will not be dominated nor will I be enslaved by any other individual or government.
-
I'm always amazed at people's fascination for killing machinery like guns and rifles.
It's more likely to be killed by a toddler with a gun than a terrorist in the US. :o
Why on earth would you need (or even want) to own a device that is designed for the sole purpose of making another human dead? As soon as countries allow civilians to own rifles, people die. We know this to be true:P
Does "it feels really awesome" justify that?
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
It's all a perception issue. I grew up around guns and learned from childhood how to shoot and how to safely handle a firearm. Virtually everyone in my small town did. We never had accidents involving firearms. I attribute that to the fact that we learned so early.
Riding a motorcycle is something not all people can wrap their heads around, and riding is inherently dangerous. So is driving an automobile. Trust me, far more people are injured in automobile and motorcycle accidents than are by firearms.
The firearm cannot be blamed for a lack of parental supervision or for any incident, for that matter. The firearm is an inanimate object. It cannot hurt you. The problem is the person handling it. Over 300,000,000 law abiding citizens with guns here in America shot NO-ONE last year. And the year before. And the year before that. And on, and on.....
Should we "outlaw" knives because they are used to decapitate innocent people? Diesel fuel and fertilizer because it can explode? Alcohol because of the people killed by drunk drivers? How about cars because of traffic fatalities? Where does it end?
-
I will not be dominated nor will I be enslaved by any other individual or government.
An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.
-
I'm always amazed at people's fascination for killing machinery like guns and rifles.
It's more likely to be killed by a toddler with a gun than a terrorist in the US. :o
Why on earth would you need (or even want) to own a device that is designed for the sole purpose of making another human dead? As soon as countries allow civilians to own rifles, people die. We know this to be true:P
Does "it feels really awesome" justify that?
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
1) you've made the mistake of thinking all firearms are only used offensively;
2) People die when guns are in the hands of the gov't at a much higher rate than when in the hands of civilians.
3) people whose gov't have guns, and the people don't are subject to the whims of their leaders at any time. Do you know anything about history? Ever seen an armed society suffer an ethnic cleansing or genocide? Ever heard of some folks like Stalin, Hitler, Polpot? Many others too. What did they have in common? guns in the hands of the gov't., not the civilians
4) There is a truth regarding history " those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it" can you understand how that works with an armed citizenry?
Steve
-
It's more likely to be killed by a toddler with a gun than a terrorist in the US. :o
That is an inaccurate statement, especially after 9/10/2001. Besides, threats other than terrorism exist all over this world. Count those in your statistics as well. And statistically speaking, I don't know many people who would prefer to become a statistic by being defenseless in the face of danger rather than having a chance to defend themselves.
Why on earth would you need (or even want) to own a device that is designed for the sole purpose of making another human dead? As soon as countries allow civilians to own rifles, people die. We know this to be true:P
The last thing law-abiding, sane gun owners want to do is to kill another human being. Besides the sports involving fire arms, some of them Olympic sports, law-abiding gun owners see guns as a means to stay alive in a dangerous situation should it present itself, not as an instrument to kill people. Your smaller neighbors to the South, the Swiss, are armed to their teeth but their crime rate is really low. Explain that.
Does "it feels really awesome" justify that?
This statement is really offensive to me. If what you meant to say is that gun owners are trying to overcome an inadequacy, well... you are right. UNarmed, I am totally inadequate against a criminal that breaks into my home or office with a gun. And so are you. Admit it. Because of this, I protect myself and my loved ones by owning a gun and learning how to use it for personal defense. Your bigger neighbors to the South the French, just learned this lesson the hard way.
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
Well, we can start with this:
http://thenewstalkers.com/forum/topics/12-reasons-why-you-should-own-a-gun-and-10-you-shouldn-t (http://thenewstalkers.com/forum/topics/12-reasons-why-you-should-own-a-gun-and-10-you-shouldn-t)
http://www.ammoland.com/2011/08/fifteen-reasons-you-should-own-a-gun/#axzz3PPyRDjzi (http://www.ammoland.com/2011/08/fifteen-reasons-you-should-own-a-gun/#axzz3PPyRDjzi)
and more tongue-in-cheek:
http://attrition.org/security/firearms/40_gun_control.html (http://attrition.org/security/firearms/40_gun_control.html)
Tzigane, I don't mean to be disrespectful or insulting, but reading your statements I can see you have drank the Kool-Aid (American slang; it's in Wikipedia) served by the European liberals. You asked for an explanation to gun ownership and I tried to provide it. Visit Texas some time and you will see that there are no dead people on the streets. Our hospitals have more people with the flu than people with "lead poisoning". The reasons to own guns are there for you to explore if you have an open mind. Whether you get one or not is still your choice, though.
-
I'm always amazed at people's fascination for killing machinery like guns and rifles.
It's more likely to be killed by a toddler with a gun than a terrorist in the US. :o
Why on earth would you need (or even want) to own a device that is designed for the sole purpose of making another human dead? As soon as countries allow civilians to own rifles, people die. We know this to be true:P
Does "it feels really awesome" justify that?
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
Dear T,
As someone who has been in law enforcement for the past 20 years let me give you some input here. Criminals do not care if the average man or woman is armed, as a matter of fact they prefer it that way. If a person has no way to protect themselves then they will be a victim at will for the criminals to exploit. Being armed is not about hoping you can kill someone, its about having the know how and ability to keep from getting killed by someone who truly has no respect for human life. If you study history you will find that any country or civilization that disarmed its citizenry usually ended up being destroyed. Anarchy is not something you want to live under. A government that disarms its citizens will eventually use guns against them. I instruct people in concealed handgun classes every year. I always tell every class the same thing, that I am teaching them a skill and giving them the ability to do something I hope they never have to use. I for one will not be one who puts my family members at risk of being robbed or attacked because I was too naïve to protect them. And if the current infestation in the white house gets his way we will have to protect ourselves from the wrath of Islamic terrorism which will come ashore here very soon.
-
...
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
I can see how many people think this. The only news you hear about is accidents, or the mentally unstable with a firearm. Even USA news. It's easy to draw a negative conclusion.
The vast majority of firearm owners in USA use their firearms for recreation. We call it "poking paper holes". We have a safe area, set up some paper targets, and poke some holes. I have two friends near Groningen that will tell you this, they visit USA often.
And you must know, some of the most tragic deaths in recent history did not use guns at all. Treblinka, Ordruf, Berkenau, New York City (9-11), Tokyo subway deaths. A few that did involve guns were an island in Norway (or was it Sweden?), and most recently Paris. The latter two happened in EU, an area that arguably has the most restrictive firearm laws in the world.
The problem is not the firearm, they are just a tool that can be used if/when you need one. Or not at all. Removing firearms from society will solve nothing.
Rick
PS: Where's Silvera? She'd move this thread elsewhere in a heartbeat ;)
-
She's probably out "Poking Holes" :cannon: :shoot:
-
Thanks guys! I'll reply more elaborately when I have some more time. :)
-
In your reply please consider how gun control worked out for Europe in the late 1930s.
-
Yep...my internet has been down
LOCKED
See how I'm taken advantaged of when I'm gone
-
Yep...my internet has been down
LOCKED
See how I'm taken advantaged of when I'm gone
...but most graciously moved for continued discussion. Thank you.
-
I'm always amazed at people's fascination for killing machinery like guns and rifles.
It's more likely to be killed by a toddler with a gun than a terrorist in the US. :o
Why on earth would you need (or even want) to own a device that is designed for the sole purpose of making another human dead? As soon as countries allow civilians to own rifles, people die. We know this to be true:P
Does "it feels really awesome" justify that?
I'm honestly baffled, an explanation would be welcomed!
I'll give you an answer....Because in this country we fought wars and fight wars to provide to it's citizens the Constitution and the Bill of RIGHTS.....NAMELY...The Second Amendment....
And by the way...the reason that terrorists are less likely to kill me in the US is....I'm ARMED.....VERY ARMED and prepared....to....PROTECT ME! Not you...
-
My best friend is a retired police sergeant, spent many years in Homicide. One of the cases he had to participate in was a family killed by an intruder. With no means of self-defense in the home, the intruder managed to overpower and tie-up the mother, father and four children. They were arranged on the living room floor, in a circle, on their bellies, facing each other. The intruder then took a clothing iron from the kitchen, and one by one, used it to punch a hole in their skulls, then took a long bladed kitchen knife and stirred it around in their brains until they died. The parents watched this happen to their kids, then the father/husband watched it happen to his wife, then he was the last victim.
I don't personally give a rat's red behind what statistics someone from another country wants to quote, and I don't care a rotten fig how many people die from any other causes.
This I DO care about: If ANYONE comes into my home to commit violence against me or my (future) wife, I will deal with them in the gravest extreme and do WHATEVER is necessary to ensure my/our safety. If it takes a firearm for that, so be it. Whether in my home or in public. If you don't want to protect yourself, that is your right and privilege but don't attempt to preach to me as to how I should or should not defend myself.
You should be aware that virtually everything you see from Hollywood, TV land, and other media, regarding firearms, is wrong.
The guys in the first video scare me because they seem to represent the uneducated American public, who only know three words: Assault rifle, bullet, gun. Everything they think they know about firearms comes from movies and TV. They acted like a bunch of ten-year olds at the zoo. The one idiot even managed to cork off a round while looking backward over his shoulder at the camera. (Yo, dude, I mean, like, hey man, like do you like know what the trigger is for?) The future of America? (Shudder.)
Firearms are not the first and only weapons we humans have invented. Clubs and thrown stones came about to defend against fists and feet. Axes and swords and other edged weapons were developed to defeat clubs. Then it escalated to spears and arrows and things that can kill at a distance. Gunpowder came along and the distance was increased. There will be a next step (the U.S. Navy now has an operable, deployed LASER weapon, mounted on one of our warships), and we'll have this same debate when we get to that. It isn't about guns, or spears, or arrows, or knives. It is about the right to be left alone and be able to defend ourselves in our homes and daily lives.
-
More children are killed by "doctors" than by firearms but it's legal.
And certain species of animals are protected.
Anyone see an oxymoron here?
-
Thanks for your replies!
I don't ever want to condemn or something, I'm just honestly curious about your reasonings and culture behind it.
Personally, I feel safer living in a place where no-one is armed with firearms.
(the chances of people being killed by firearm-related accidents being higher than the chances of getting attacked by someone and having to defend yourself with a firearm)
But I do get the principle of having the right to defend yourself. It's a culture thing I guess. :)
The argument about the doctors is a bit silly though, I'm sorry, it's false cause reasoning. :P
If we had no doctors at all, a lot more people would die. If there weren't any guns in the world at all, it wouldn't cause more people to die. :P
Stay safe guys! :)
-
I guess it's a matter of who do you trust more with your life, yourself or some complete stranger who doesn't give a damn about you and is an hour away eating donuts.
-
. If there weren't any guns in the world at all, it wouldn't cause more people to die. :P
Stay safe guys! :)
and I disagree....no way to prove that I suppose....but there were a whole lot of humans killed by others before guns came into being....
-
Personally, I feel safer living in a place where no-one is armed with firearms.
When you find that place, let us know. I don't think it exists anywhere close by.
Got to give everyone in this thread credit for reasonable thoughts and conversations. I fall on the side of the 2nd Amendment and not taking any more freedoms away than they already have in that respect...should give us back a few as a matter of fact. (Like that will ever happen) :chugbeer:
-
Well, I'm confused.
Tzigane's profile says he's in Rotterdam, Netherlands. OK. But here are some firearm stats for the Netherlands:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/netherlands (http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/netherlands)
"The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in the Netherlands is 510,000."
"The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in the Netherlands is 3.91 firearms per 100 people."
"The number of registered guns in the Netherlands is reported to be 330,000."
That leaves about 180,000 unregistered firearms. If I read it right, those unregistered arms are illegal.
Tzigane, I think some of your 16.8 million neighbors may have some hidden toys. ;) I hope they are all friendly.
Actually, the Netherlands is one country I have always wanted to visit, but probably won't ever get around to. It is likely safer than where I live in any case, guns aside.
Be safe!
-
Personally, I feel safer living in a place where no-one is armed with firearms.
And there is the #1 misconception right there about "gun control". Making guns illegal takes them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. It does *NOT* make society gunless. I guarantee you that criminals will still be armed, they will always find a way. Government officials will be armed also (police, military, and spook agencies).
As long as it is possible for humans to make weapons, they will be made and they will be distributed. And I, for one, feel much safer knowing that I live in a country where the normal, moral, good, law-abiding citizens are allowed to protect themselves.
-
And there is the #1 misconception right there about "gun control". Making guns illegal takes them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. It does *NOT* make society gunless. I guarantee you that criminals will still be armed, they will always find a way. Government officials will be armed also (police, military, and spook agencies).
As long as it is possible for humans to make weapons, they will be made and they will be distributed. And I, for one, feel much safer knowing that I live in a country where the normal, moral, good, law-abiding citizens are allowed to protect themselves.
...and others.
Thank God for good men willing to do extreme violence.
-
I just saw an article that claimed Massachusetts has the 2nd lowest gun fatalities nationwide. Sure, I can see that, it's hard to get a gun in MA. But nobody looks any deeper than the headline. What was the rate of violent homicides? If it runs with the national average, then the gun issue is a moot point. Killed by a knife or shovel is just as dead.
The real problem is folks who don't own guns don't understand why others do. They see a gun in the hands of civilians strictly in an offensive usage, though they want the police armed for defensive use. The understand you can kill someone with a kitchen knife or a shovel, or a car, but "hey - I use those things almost everyday - you can't take it away from me - I didn't kill anyone with my car / knife / shovel today" . They just fail to apply that thought process to the person who has a gun for defensive purposes. Steve
-
From 2013...http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/02/17/the-nation-toughest-gun-control-law-made-massachusetts-less-safe/3845k7xHzkwTrBWy4KpkEM/story.html (http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/02/17/the-nation-toughest-gun-control-law-made-massachusetts-less-safe/3845k7xHzkwTrBWy4KpkEM/story.html)
IN 1998, Massachusetts passed what was hailed as the toughest gun-control legislation in the country. Among other stringencies, it banned semiautomatic “assault” weapons, imposed strict new licensing rules, prohibited anyone convicted of a violent crime or drug trafficking from ever carrying or owning a gun, and enacted severe penalties for storing guns unlocked.
The 1998 legislation did cut down, quite sharply, on the legal use of guns in Massachusetts. Within four years, the number of active gun licenses in the state had plummeted. “There were nearly 1.5 million active gun licenses in Massachusetts in 1998,” the AP reported. “In June [2002], that number was down to just 200,000.” The author of the law, state Senator Cheryl Jacques, was pleased that the Bay State’s stiff new restrictions had made it possible to “weed out the clutter.”
Since 1998, gun crime in Massachusetts has gotten worse, not better. In 2011, Massachusetts recorded 122 murders committed with firearms, the Globe reported this month — “a striking increase from the 65 in 1998.” Other crimes rose too. Between 1998 and 2011, robbery with firearms climbed 20.7 percent. Aggravated assaults jumped 26.7 percent.
and one it goes...the AntiGunCrowd will never admit they're wrong...
-
Very interesting. Switzerland also has a lot of people with guns, but they all get mandatory training too.
I'm not pro or against by the way, I don't have enough knowledge of the matter to support any position or form an actual opinion yet. :)
The idea that other object can be used as weapons too is flawed as an argument. A gun is specifically designed to effectively kill another human from a distance. A tool like a shed or a car has a different and practical purpose and is therefore less likely to be banned. Restricted though. Hence the driver's licences, and police and laws that control safety and such.
Sure there are (illegal) guns here in the Netherlands too. The chances of actually being shot are absurdly small though, so I don't ever feel the need to carry a gun myself to "protect myself". Just like I don't think it's needed to wear a helmet when walking down the street, in case anyone dropped a potted plant from a window. :P
I have never been, and I have not ever known anyone who has been in a situation that would have ended better if there were legal guns involved. Furthmore, IF you are robbed/attacked or whatever, will having a gun actually matter? Will you, being a normal human being with normal hormonal levels (read, producing a shitload of epinephrine, severely impairing judgment, in a situation like that) be able to use a gun in a way that will help keep you and others around you safe?
Some people claim the principal right to defend yourself against the government, which I think it's oddly irrational:
1) you really think there is a good chance your government will use its army (which consists of normal people like you and me) to attack civilians?
2) Say the government used things like drones/robots/ evil soldiers bent on attack civilians, does having a rifle really keep you safe?
3) is that irrational fear worth keeping a device around the house that has no other purpose than to kill things and if misused or by accident is also likely to indeed severely wound or kill a person?
Maybe I lack some perspective because I didn't grow up around guns. But as far as I can see the only reasons to keep guns around are irrational fears of being attacked by someone in a way where having a gun would actually matter. else/government and "it's awesome" (which, don't get my wrong, I get completely)
Once again, just curious and being unknowing of the culture and views around owning and using weaponry like that. :)
-
Some people claim the principal right to defend yourself against the government, which I think it's oddly irrational:
1) you really think there is a good chance your government will use its army (which consists of normal people like you and me) to attack civilians?
2) Say the government used things like drones/robots/ evil soldiers bent on attack civilians, does having a rifle really keep you safe?
3) is that irrational fear worth keeping a device around the house that has no other purpose than to kill things and if misused or by accident is also likely to indeed severely wound or kill a person?
1) yes, history of the last century teaches this. The soldiers of Germany, Japan, Cambodia etc considered themselves "normal people".
2) no, but far safer than not having anything.
3) Far, far more likely that I would get hurt riding a motorcycle than accidentally by my guns. BTW: the primary purpose of my
guns is not to kill things, but to protect myself and my family. You do not have to kill something to use a gun for protection.
Just ask police officers. It is very rare that they use their gun to kill. But just having it most of the time is enough to stop
someone from attacking them.
The United States was relatively untouched amidst multiple genocides of the last century. I think the main reason was because of our freedom. There are specific areas in the US that are dangerous to crime. These are mostly due to racism and cultural history, not due to our second amendment. In fact in most of those places, gun ownership is far more limited. Specific neighborhoods in Chicago, New York and Washington to name a few. Outside of those areas our crime rate is very similar to Europe. I've been to Amsterdam, Nijmegen and Eindhoven. Beautiful country by the way. I am just as safe walking down the street in Colorado Springs, CO, or Austin TX as I was walking around those cities.
-
You have grown up with a nanny state government and I guess that's alright if that's what you're used too. I will not bow my head to anyone and hope they don't kill me. And governments have a well documented record of killing their own people. Have you not read any history?
-
Maybe it's a matter of perspective. The Netherlands land area ( 16,000sq miles) will fit in the state of West Virginia (24,000sq miles). When we go for a long motorcycle ride it can be for 3000 miles and stay in the same country, speak the same language and spend the same money as everybody else. We need no passports and no travel papers. There are areas of hundreds of square miles where no one lives. This is not like Europe which has been settled for thousands of years. We as a country are less than three hundred years old. There are still animals that can be higher on the food chain than us if we are not careful. We have been more or less at war with a few stretches of not war since our inception. Many have suffered because of that but many millions more, including Europe, have been the beneficiary of our efforts. Not bragging or excusing, just stating facts. We were born to war and taking care of our own both as a nation and as individuals. When anyone, including our own politicians, try to infringe on our natural rights we don't take it well. We were not born to be sheep.
-
I have insurance on my motorcycle. I hope I never need it.
I have fire extinguishers. I hope I never need them.
I have guns. I hope I never need them.
Get it ? Got it? Good.
-
What if you want to go target shooting at fire extinguishers from the back of your motorcycle? Will your insurance cover that?
-
Not in the Netherlands.
-
Sure there are (illegal) guns here in the Netherlands too. The chances of actually being shot are absurdly small though, so I don't ever feel the need to carry a gun myself to "protect myself".
And that is great. But it is difficult to compare a small and very homogeneous country like the Netherlands to the USA. The situation is very different. The lower level of violence/crime is not due to the lack of guns. It is more likely about compatibility of upbringing, education, values, religion, income equity, politics, etc.
is that irrational fear worth keeping a device around the house that has no other purpose than to kill things
It is no more irrational than those who fear good and responsible people HAVING guns.
and if misused or by accident is also likely to indeed severely wound or kill a person?
Cars, motorcycles, bicycles, drugs drugs, power tools, heaters, food, and many other things are misused or cause accidents which can and do kill many, many, many thousands of times more people than guns do in the hands of non-criminals.
Maybe I lack some perspective because I didn't grow up around guns.
Perhaps, but it is more likely you just lack perspective because you are in a less potentially dangerous area. Please keep in mind that the VAST majority of US citizens do not own guns. And huge areas of the USA have low violence. But the USA is a huge place, with lots of incredibly large cities, and the freedom we enjoy (which is less and less each year, unfortunately) gives incentive to some people to use that freedom for destructive/criminal purposes instead of constructive/peaceful purposes.
You can have more freedom or more safety. Not both. So I will close with one of the most important quotes of all time... from one of the founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-
A good reply, thank you! I'm beginning to see the point to it.
How is weapon possession regulated over there? Do you need a license/take a test or something?
And indeed, I often read about the freedom that is been taken away. both in the USA and here in Europe.
Mass surveillance and privacy infringement because of imaginary "terrorists".. But that's a different topic altogether.
No amount of guns will save us from that. :-\
-
A good reply, thank you! I'm beginning to see the point to it.
How is weapon possession regulated over there? Do you need a license/take a test or something?
And indeed, I often read about the freedom that is been taken away. both in the USA and here in Europe.
Mass surveillance and privacy infringement because of imaginary "terrorists".. But that's a different topic altogether.
No amount of guns will save us from that. :-\
It differs from state to state and in some cases city to city. In most of the US, you do not need a license or test just to own a gun. You do have to get a background check to buy from a licensed dealer. That is to say they check to make sure you are not on a felony list. Most states (over 30) now allow carrying a concealed handgun with a permit. I don't know all the laws of every state but most require some training as well as a background check to get this permit. Most if not all states do not allow you to carry even with a permit into schools, banks and government buildings. Please note that in all cases of tragic school shootings here in the US it is strictly forbidden to have a gun. The psychopaths don't care and in fact know that all their victims are unarmed. In states such as I have lived for the last 30 years, Colorado and Texas, as long as you are not on a forbidden list you can buy a gun, have it in your house or in your car, and carry it openly in the country. All fully automatic guns (any gun where more than one bullet is fired when the trigger is pulled) and silencers are forbidden unless you have a specific federal license. Those licenses are expensive and difficult to get and very regulated.
-
Neil Young, from the 70's. I'm sure you've heard of him. Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young.
Some people claim the principal right to defend yourself against the government, which I think it's oddly irrational:
1) you really think there is a good chance your government will use its army (which consists of normal people like you and me) to attack civilians?
Kent State Shootings - Ohio - Neil Young (1970) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FakLUusNlXc#)
-
Thanks for the info Rhino!
Rick: What happened there was horrible indeed. :-\
How would the situation be different if the students were armed though? :)
-
Every time I hear that song I get goose bumps and shiver over soldiers killing the ones they are supposed to protect. I visited the site a few years ago.
-
Thanks for the info Rhino!
Rick: What happened there was horrible indeed. :-\
How would the situation be different if the students were armed though? :)
Nothing would have changed in that one tragic incident. In fact it was probably good that no students fired back. But I have to wonder if things might have been different in the Warsaw ghetto in 1943 or if the jewish population in Europe in 1940 was as well armed as the US population is now. Would things have been different? Or how about the population of Cambodia in the 1970's?
-
or China....or Russia....or....the Aztecs...or....just about any population who doesn't want to be conquered and enslaved.
-
How would the situation be different if the students were armed though? :)
It is a whole lot harder to control/intimidate a group of people when they are also armed.
Peace through superior firepower.....
-
Dear T,
As someone who has been in law enforcement for the past 20 years let me give you some input here. Criminals do not care if the average man or woman is armed, as a matter of fact they prefer it that way. If a person has no way to protect themselves then they will be a victim at will for the criminals to exploit.
Was out doing some reading on various threads and ran across this one which contaned some well stated thoughts by numerous folks. Possibly the italicized/underlined text was not quite what was meant to be conveyed!?? The following line tends to counter the previous.
I've never heard of a criminal preferring that their victims be armed.
-
Well in regards to the title of this thread " If this doesn't make the point, I don't know what does" ....I had to guess exactly what the point was of the first two videos. I'll go out on a limb and say that you were trying to show how a historically antagonistic and potential enemy country of the U.S. has a high school competition where students of both sexes are able to disassemble and reassemble some weapon, and yet 3 out of 4 American men look somewhat foolish handling various firearms? ..and we are supposed to feel doomed if we go to war with Russia?
I'm not taking a pro gun stand here nor an anti gun stand...I'm just addressing the title...so perhaps I'm obtuse, but just posting those two videos didn't really make the point with me. I had to guess and I'm still not sure if I got it right. However, I found this post to be crystal clear.
1) you've made the mistake of thinking all firearms are only used offensively;
2) People die when guns are in the hands of the gov't at a much higher rate than when in the hands of civilians.
3) people whose gov't have guns, and the people don't are subject to the whims of their leaders at any time. Do you know anything about history? Ever seen an armed society suffer an ethnic cleansing or genocide? Ever heard of some folks like Stalin, Hitler, Polpot? Many others too. What did they have in common? guns in the hands of the gov't., not the civilians
4) There is a truth regarding history " those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it" can you understand how that works with an armed citizenry?
So going back to before this became a pro-firearm/anti-firearm in the hands of the people debate (page 1, post 3), in words please, Steve was my guess even close? :-\
-
Most if not all states do not allow you to carry even with a permit into schools, banks and government buildings.
I have never heard of the list including banks, and I just checked my "blue book" and there is no mention of that (so it certainly doesn't apply in Virginia).... although "places of worship", "airport gates", and "military bases" typically ARE on the list.
-
Well in regards to the title of this thread [...]
How dare you attempt to be on-topic!!
-
I have never heard of the list including banks, and I just checked my "blue book" and there is no mention of that (so it certainly doesn't apply in Virginia).... although "places of worship", "airport gates", and "military bases" typically ARE on the list.
Oops, sorry, not sure where I got that from.
-
Oops, sorry, not sure where I got that from.
Well, might be true somewhere, I don't know. They love throwing in stupid exceptions.
-
In Arizona, banks, anywhere alcohol is served, government buildings, schools, anywhere it is posted as "No Firearms", and to be honest, I forget the other places where firearms are verboten.... We have constitutional carry here, no permit required to carry concealed. Gotta love it!
-
In Arizona, banks, anywhere alcohol is served, government buildings, schools, anywhere it is posted as "No Firearms", and to be honest, I forget the other places where firearms are verboten.... We have constitutional carry here, no permit required to carry concealed. Gotta love it!
Well, you might love that part, but Virginia finally did away with that incredibly stupid "where alcohol is served" stuff. Of course, you can't legally DRINK while armed, though.
-
Haha, just came across this and had to think of our earlier conversation here.
Quite sums up my thoughts as well, this guy just brings it better and funnier than I could. ;D
http://www.vox.com/2015/3/24/8283199/gun-control-comedy-jefferies?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=article%3Atop&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook (http://www.vox.com/2015/3/24/8283199/gun-control-comedy-jefferies?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=article%3Atop&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook)
-
I have to admit that guy is funny. Full of $hit, but funny. Gun ban made zero difference on homicide rates.
(http://www.gunfacts.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Guns-in-other-countries-Australian-Homicide-Trends-with-and-without-firearms.jpg)
-
The US does have higher homicide rates than many countries and many people think that is because of lack of gun control. But the US doesn't even make the top 100 and the top 10 have total bans on private gun ownership.
(http://www.gunfacts.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Guns-in-other-countries-homicides-per-100000-people-top-ten-countries-plus-Unites-States.jpg)
-
Sorry, but one more, this chart shows no correlation between firearm ownership rates versus homicide rates.
(http://www.gunfacts.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Guns-in-other-countries-firearm-owenership-and-homicides.jpg)
-
Those statistics are actually kind of flawed I'm sorry to say.. :) They're comparing against specific countries to try and present the facts to be viewd in a certain (wrong) way.
Those countries are not at all comparable like this. You can't directly compare the US to Honduras or Zambia, that doesn't make any statistical sense whatsoever. Too many other factors will be at play. It also seems like all the comparable western countries are about equal because the Y axis of the last graph is zoomed out, which they are not.
Zooming in we see that the US looks to have a rather high rate compared to finland, sweden, canada, iceland, new zealand etc. For the numbers to be meaningful, we have to compare to comparable countries. Doing this, we find that gun ownership dóes correlate with gun deaths per capita. There is a LOT of evidence supporting this:
(http://www.humanosphere.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/GunViolence.png)
(http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/50cf5c5eecad049f7a000004-590-/deaths-vs-guns.png)
This gives a whole different view on things.
http://www.humanosphere.org/science/2014/03/visualizing-gun-deaths-comparing-the-u-s-to-rest-of-the-world/#prettyPhoto (http://www.humanosphere.org/science/2014/03/visualizing-gun-deaths-comparing-the-u-s-to-rest-of-the-world/#prettyPhoto)
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/09/19/u-s-has-more-guns-and-gun-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/09/19/u-s-has-more-guns-and-gun-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/)
http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/01/gun-violence-us-cities-compared-deadliest-nations-world/4412/ (http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/01/gun-violence-us-cities-compared-deadliest-nations-world/4412/)
http://www.businessinsider.com/shooting-gun-laws-2012-12?IR=T (http://www.businessinsider.com/shooting-gun-laws-2012-12?IR=T)
Concerning Australia. We DO see a drop off actually. Also: Homicide rate is not the only way people can die from guns.
(http://www.abc.net.au/cm/lb/4905120/data/chart3a-deaths-resulting-from-firearms-data.jpg)
We also find a statistically significant decrease in suicide rates, interesting. :)
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/08/australia_suicides.jpg)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-23/katter-wrong-on-gun-deaths/4904576 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-23/katter-wrong-on-gun-deaths/4904576)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/)
All in all, I think the actual question, knowing fully well that more guns equals more gun deaths, is: Is it worth it. :) To "protect" yourself (I honestly don't buy into that argument, the chances of coming across people who want to murder you AND you having your gun at the ready are negligable, we're not living in the wild west anymore). It seems to be causing more harm (in actual deaths of people) than good (being "yay it's awesome to have guns, which I understand)
-
Those statistics are actually kind of flawed I'm sorry to say.. :) They're comparing against specific countries to try and present the facts to be viewd in a certain (wrong) way.
Those countries are not at all comparable like this. You can't directly compare the US to Honduras or Zambia, that doesn't make any statistical sense whatsoever. Too many other factors will be at play.
Exactly my point. If you put all the factors in, guns are not nearly as significant. Culture and history become much more significant. The areas in the US that have the high murder rates typically do have strict gun control. In fact most of the US have similar rates to that of Europe. The countries you want to compare to the US are MUCH older and have little or no history of slavery and racism. Honduras in the "New World" is actually a closer comparison to the history of the US than Finland is.
You also say "Homicide rate is not the only way people can die from guns." Thank you for making another point. I wonder what your "Assault by firearm" graph looks like when you add all forms of assault. Is it better to be murdered by other means? Same with suicide rate. Of course "suicide by firearm" goes down when gun ownership is banned. Look at the suicide rate in Japan where gun ownership is virtually unheard of. Is it really so much better to commit suicide by other means?
The funny guy actually makes a great point, our second amendment is not about individual crime. It is all about last line of defense against tyranny. Amazing how many Americans don't understand this truth. His argument is one I've heard a million times. That is that since the government has drones, its silly to think you can resist with mere guns. Actually no. If there is one thing we in have learned in the last couple of decades is that massive air power is not a substitute for boots on the ground carrying rifles.
-
Evidently netflix didn't think the guy was funny since they have blocked the video.
-
Exactly my point. If you put all the factors in, guns are not nearly as significant. Culture and history become much more significant. The areas in the US that have the high murder rates typically do have strict gun control. In fact most of the US have similar rates to that of Europe.
Yep. Let's face it, one can make statistics show just about any conclusion one wants to obtain. Just change the samples, factors, wording, and assumptions. I can easily find statistics that show gun deaths and crime go *up* when tighter gun controls are enactacted.
The USA is far, far, far less homogeneous than most western European countries in just about every way- race, religion, background, ethnicity, economic, education, values, etc. Increased diversity = more crime. Increased freedom usually = more crime. Neither increased diversity nor freedom is a bad thing. Freedom does ALWAYS come at a price.
The countries you want to compare to the US are MUCH older and have little or no history of slavery and racism.
As far as I know, just about every country has a history of slavery and racism.... that is, if they contained humans.
-
Yep. Let's face it, one can make statistics show just about any conclusion one wants to obtain. Just change the samples, factors, wording, and assumptions. I can easily find statistics that show gun deaths and crime go *up* when tighter gun controls are enactacted.
The USA is far, far, far less homogeneous than most western European countries in just about every way- race, religion, background, ethnicity, economic, education, values, etc. Increased diversity = more crime. Increased freedom usually = more crime. Neither increased diversity nor freedom is a bad thing. Freedom does ALWAYS come at a price.
As far as I know, just about every country has a history of slavery and racism.... that is, if they contained humans.
..and so far we're only half full of marxists.
-
Guns, motorcycles, children, don't want one, don't have one. (Or more) Do NOT tell me I can't have something because it scares you or makes you uncomfortable. I DON'T CARE. I find children to be a real pita. I won't presume to tell you not to have them.
-
I know I'm a little late to the party here...lol, but what was the point of the two videos again?...lol.
Sorry Steve...just kiddin'...kind of. 8)
Just a note about that second video of the kids in Russia. I've actually spent quite a bit of time in Russia...and I mean in real old fashioned Russia (not just Moscow). The fact that these kids can do this doesn't surprise me. Of all the countries I have been in (almost 30), Russia is still the strangest and most surreal place I have ever been. Anyway...just a word to compare to the USA...I never did see anybody carrying a gun in Russia...other than security guards at the hotels and factories where I was staying/working. I've been to 48 of the US states, and I have seen lots of people with guns...just about every place I worked in Florida I met a guy that had a gun laying on the seat of his truck/car.
In the US, one might worry about being killed by a gun...but in Russia, I think you'd be just as likely to be killed by a 2x4, a crowbar, or with somebody's bare hands...lol. No joke.
As a resident of cold and boring old Canada, we sure do have a different culture here. I'm not saying it's better or worse, just different. I am currently waiting for my rPAL licence, so I guess you could say I'm "pro-gun"...lol.
Anyway...having spent a great deal of time in much of the USA, and quite a bit in Russia, I can say that the two countries are so shockingly different, I don't think you could compare them in any meaningful way.
Rem