Your opinion of guns

[AndThen?]

Cars kill people also. A hell of a lot more than guns do.

Example: in 2005, there were 12,352 firearm-related homicides in the USA (source: http://www.cdc.gov/ ). In that same year, there were 43,200 traffic-related deaths (source). So vehicles are 3.5X more-deadly than firearms. Why aren't you 3.5X more adamant about banning vehicles? Sure, they've got positive uses (like guns), but that can't hardly justify the massive difference in how deadly they are?

Meanwhile, approximately 440,000 deaths were caused by smoking (source). That makes cigarettes over 35 times more-deadly than firearms. So why aren't you proportionally against tobacco?

I'm not denying that there are other ways for people to be killed. But we're talking about guns here, so lets stick to that.

Your "black and white" feelings don't weight in regards to the facts. Unfortunately too many people let emotion get in the way of reality, no matter how much truth, facts, and statistics you present them. That's how the UK is in the mess it's in (see the earlier article I linked to for reference).

So? Think about the possible situations:

1) Bad guy has gun, good guy has gun = good guy is on equal-footing with bad guy, forcing bad guy to rethink the situation.

2) Bad guy doesn't have gun, good guy has gun = good guy is at advantage, crime deterred

3) Bad guy has gun, good guy does not = good guy loses

It blows me away that people advocate #3. And if they think gun laws will prevent #3, they are delusional and ignoring the facts.

So you're saying everyone should be armed at all times? Think of it this way: Bad guy has a gun, good guy reaches for a gun. Guess who loses.

It's hard for you (a law-abiding citizen) to get ahold of a gun. Rest assured the criminals have them, just like in the UK.

There... aren't that many criminals here.

Pot is illegal in the USA, guns are not. I think more people own pot than guns. Prohibition of alcohol failed, and so do gun laws.

There's more pot than guns here too! I think it's just the trend.

Because shooting is the only way someone can kill someone? Once again, you are overlook the simple fact that if someone wants to kill someone, they will find a way to do it, with or without a gun. Sure, gun control might reduce gun-related deaths, but when murder remains high in Adelaide, what can you actually brag about?

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/stories/s635701.htm

Now it gets personal. You're talking about the Falconio case. HUGE scandal. Everyone knows about it. A rare crime. My evidence is from the very article you cited (read your "evidence" first):

The United States has a homocide rate about four times that of Australia... South Australia has had a lower homocide rate than the national rate for most of the last ten years or so... this journalist must have just made it up.

My cousin found his dad's gun once (they're farmers so they can have one). Boom. He's paraplegic now. So excuuuuse me if I don't approve of guns. He was lucky, too.

 

[Napalmbrain]

I also laugh at your inability to trust anyone who would find anything enjoyable about a firearm. You honestly believe that anyone who likes guns is a crazy person? I suppose it can go the other way, people saying "The second amendment is just as important as the 1st".

Perhaps I'm being a little extreme, but I don't like the idea of being around guns. Maybe it's just paranoia, but I find them a little disturbing.

I don't really have "fun" target practicing any more than I have "fun" practicing fire alarm tests. I do both with a serious tone because I know the real purpose behind them.

I did say "using guns for recreation" in the post.

 

[Brawny]

Nor do you see graphs previously posted that prove otherwise, nor do you see yourself in my arms. =P

Edit: a lot of accidents are being quoted.

That is the fault of the parents, both for not locking it up, keeping it unloaded, and not properly educating.

 

[Byuakuya]

I don't see any hunters shooting anyone either.

@ Pras...oh you mean like Vermont? -_-;

What/Who is Vermont?

 

[Frogger]

Immediately when mentioning gun crime, most people think of the USA where the ‘right to bear arms’ gives citizens the right to own weapons.

Following the death of PC Beshenivsky, Lord Stevens (a former head of the Metropolitan Police Service) called for the arming of all officers and the re-introduction of the death penalty.

If the USA and England and Wales had the same population size, the USA would have 34 times the number of shooting homicides that the UK has.
The USA still has the death penalty and all its police officers carry weapons.
The UK has a much lower rate of these deaths than most countries. For example, Switzerland and Canada have three times the number of shooting deaths.

Ho damn.

 

[Brawny]

Vermont, is a state with lax gun laws, and low crime rate. (y)

Upscaling proportions really doesn't work. The fact that the UK is the same size as a single state is definitely a help in that cause.

Just the sheer number of big cities alone.

Edit 2: I could probably work welfare into this too.

 

[Byuakuya]

Vermont, is a state with lax gun laws, and low crime rate. (y)

Upscaling proportions really doesn't work. The fact that the UK is the same size as a single state is definitely a help in that cause.

Just the sheer number of big cities alone.

Ah, I see. I was actually quoting the gangster in a film called Romeo Must Die.

 

[Frogger]

Vermont, is a state with lax gun laws, and low crime rate. (y)

Upscaling proportions really doesn't work. The fact that the UK is the same size as a single state is definitely a help in that cause.

Just the sheer number of big cities alone.

Edit 2: I could probably work welfare into this too.

So that would prove Sremick's theory of the UK having more crime anyway would also be wrong because of that?

I can't believe you wanted a gun in the house.

 

[Brawny]

I didn't say in the house. You said in the first page, that you were okay with a separate, locked room, with a locked, fireproof safe...

It all depends on per-capita and per-1000 observation.

 

[Frogger]

I didn't say in the house. You said in the first page, that you were okay with a separate, locked room, with a locked, fireproof safe...

It all depends on per-capita and per-1000 observation.

The guy does it for a living.


You won't.

 

[Brawny]

Controlling...

You DO know my job may consist of designing explosive projectiles, right?

 

[Frogger]

Controlling...

You DO know my job may consist of designing explosive projectiles, right?

Oh, so this is why you want to live in America too?

 

[Brawny]

Unless the English military doesn't use missiles, not necessarily.

I like our prices! And we have better fast food!

 

[Frogger]

Unless the English military doesn't use missiles, not necessarily.

I like our prices! And we have better fast food!

Oh joy, you're a stereotypical slave to the wage!

And people in the army, I thiiink they know a little more about handling weapons than every other US citizen who can get their hands on one easily, for little purpose.

 

[Brawny]

So it's the difficulty of acquiring one that worries you? I like the licensing needed for handguns, but banning everything like many of you propose is just retarded.

And if my wages determine my doting on my wife, then yes!