HISTORICAL FACTS ABOUT GUN CONTROL

[gen11]

The following is historical fact. Form your own conclusions:

1911: Turkey establishes gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians were rounded up and exterminated.

1929: Soviet Union establishes gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents were rounded up and exterminated, plus another 30 miliion that were starved to dealth in the Ukrane.

1935: China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents were rounded up and esterminated.

1938: Germany established gun control. We know what happened to German citizens, European Jews, and the whole world afterwards.

1956: Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, between one to two million "educated" people were rounded up and exterminated.

1964: Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded up and exterminated.

1979: Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians were rounded up and extermined. Total dead in Uganda during this
time is estimate at two to three million.

Australia: Gun owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, destroyed by the government at a cost of approximately $400 million.
Homicides went up 3.2 percent
Armed robberies went up 44 percent. That's not 4.4 percent, it's 44.
In the State of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300 percent

[Realist]

Huffington Post 6/26/10:

Chicago Police Department statistics, we were told, reveal that the City's handgun murder rate has actually increased since the ban was enacted and that Chicago residents now face one of the highest murder rates in the country and rates of other violent crimes that exceed the average in comparable cities.

[tenni]

Gen
Are your facts about "gun control" or banning gun ownership?

12185

[gladius]

http://www.european-freedom-initiative.org/images/stories/notbg.jpg

This picture was taken the same year that Germany confiscated all guns.

[tenni]

Countries with a total death rate by guns


most deaths by guns ranked highest to lowest


1/ El Salvador
9/ Mexico
10/ USA
20/ Switzerland
25/ France
27/ New Zealand
32/ Canada
34/ Israel
51/ Germany
53/ Australia
65/ Britain United Kingdom
73/ Japan
75/ Chile


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

* the information is not from the same year but the stats have been similar rankings for more than ten years. Not all countries release information on gun deaths each year but the US has consistently been in the top ten and has not been at formal civil war for over a century while Uganda, Guatamala, Cambodia, etc. have. The US is the only G8 country in the top twenty countries for gun deaths.

[darkeyes]

The following is historical fact. Form your own conclusions:

1911: Turkey establishes gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians were rounded up and exterminated.

1929: Soviet Union establishes gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents were rounded up and exterminated, plus another 30 miliion that were starved to dealth in the Ukrane.

1935: China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents were rounded up and esterminated.

1938: Germany established gun control. We know what happened to German citizens, European Jews, and the whole world afterwards.

1956: Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, between one to two million "educated" people were rounded up and exterminated.

1964: Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded up and exterminated.

1979: Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians were rounded up and extermined. Total dead in Uganda during this
time is estimate at two to three million.

Australia: Gun owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, destroyed by the government at a cost of approximately $400 million.
Homicides went up 3.2 percent
Armed robberies went up 44 percent. That's not 4.4 percent, it's 44.
In the State of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300 percentHistorical fact also needs historical perspective. Gladys babes....many of the facts u give had very little to do with gun control, but the prevailing circumstances of the time in each country... and I suggest u look again at Uganda.. and think and check about what u have stated as fact (have thought about it which is why I raise it.. but haven't checked it...)... it actually makes u look a bit of a dick.. but.bland "facts" do nothing whatsoever to aid ur case... for every "fact" u provide, fact can be provided to argue quite the opposite...

[falcondfw]

Look at it this way people. They are CRIMINALS! Do you seriously think they are going to obey laws banning guns when they are already breaking laws?

[darkeyes]

Look at it this way people. They are CRIMINALS! Do you seriously think they are going to obey laws banning guns when they are already breaking laws?
..and so we make it easy for them?:eek2:

[tenni]

Guns per capital ranked from most guns to least in 2007 stats


1/ USA
2/ Serbia
3/ Switzerland
6/ Saudi Arabla
7/ Iraq
10/ Sweden
13/ Canada
15/ Germany
22/ New Zealand
25/ Northern Ireland
42/ Australia
79/ Israel
88/ England & Wales
93/ Scotland
102/ China




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

[darkeyes]

Oops.. soz Gen n Gladys... bit of a mix up ther hey?:yikes2:

[gen11]

Tenni: There are over 2500 documented instances in the US from 2012 alone in which an armed citizen prevented or stopped a violent crime.

My opinion is that a firearm is a tool. When my hammer is out of reach, I'll pick up a vice-grip pliers to strike my chisel.

[tenni]

Tenni: There are over 2500 documented instances in the US from 2012 alone in which an armed citizen prevented or stopped a violent crime.

My opinion is that a firearm is a tool. When my hammer is out of reach, I'll pick up a vice-grip pliers to strike my chisel.

As far as your opinion that a gun is a tool, that is true. Interesting that I don't hear people in my country making this type of connection with hammers, guns, etc. It reads as brainwashing to me and a justification/rationalization by people who want their country to have increasing gun violence rather than merely factual.

As far as documented instances in which an armed citizen prevented a violent crime, it reads to me as a very violent culture rather than preventative. Historically, your country has been a very violent invasive culture. Which other countries track guns as preventative to violent crimes?

More than 500,000 people died from gun violence in Brazil between 1979 and 2003. Studies show a strong, inverse relationship between homicide rates and both economic development and economic equality.

Gender differences (of violence) are least marked for children. For the 15 to 29 age group, male rates (of violence) were nearly six times those for female rates; for the remaining age groups, male rates were from two to four times those for females.

[gladius]

Wasn't all this horseshit vented about by the Ameriphobic Tennis' other thread?

[Libby99nIL]

What does all this have to do with being bisexual??

[Tabu61]

Good question!.......What does this have to do with the bisexual community.....there are plenty of other sites to rant on about gun control.Forum: Main ForumDiscuss anything here. In keeping with the culture of our community, be polite always.

[gladius]

What does all this have to do with being bisexual??

It has plenty to do with being bi, Libby. Being bisexual doesn't resign one to being a cock monster or muff diver alone. We do have our private opinions, as well as our private lives, that do not actually always and forever pertain to sex.

[darkeyes]

Quite a lot.. many gay and bisexual people have had their lives ended by shooting... as a community, we are part of this world, and what goes on in it affects the lgbt just as it does any other group of people... we should never be so insular as to think what goes on in the big bad world is of no interest to us, neither should we show ourselves ignorant of it. We are first and foremost human beings.. what goes on around us affects us.. and if we are to be treated seriously as a group of people, we should show the world that we care for that world, for our fellow human beings and for life on this planet.. that we think a little more than about simply the bits we have between our legs and what and whom we can do with them .. fail to do that and those who would return us to the oblivion of the closet, the travails of repression and remove from us the right to be, to love and desire who we will, as they do, shall feel themselves well satisfied that we have proven ourselves as nothing but the perversions that they claim us to be, interested in nothing but the perversions that they claim of us and will have surrendered our right to be considered equal to them in this world, also our basic humanity and our right to be considered compassionate and.decent human beings... we are more than sex, more than our sexuality.. these are but a small part of us.. we are human beings who live on this earth.. that is why we debate issues such as this...

[Annika L]

What does all this have to do with being bisexual??

Good question!.......What does this have to do with the bisexual community...

What *doesn't* have to do with being bisexual? Are we not individuals in the world?


Countries with a total death rate by guns


most deaths by guns ranked highest to lowest

1/ El Salvador
9/ Mexico
10/ USA
20/ Switzerland
25/ France
27/ New Zealand
32/ Canada
34/ Israel
51/ Germany
53/ Australia
65/ Britain United Kingdom
73/ Japan
75/ Chile


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

* the information is not from the same year but the stats have been similar rankings for more than ten years. Not all countries release information on gun deaths each year but the US has consistently been in the top ten and has not been at formal civil war for over a century while Uganda, Guatamala, Cambodia, etc. have. The US is the only G8 country in the top twenty countries for gun deaths.

Hi tenni. I want to clarify this ordering...is this *per capita* gun-related deaths (#gun deaths / total population)? Or absolute number (#gun deaths)? Or percentage of deaths due to guns (#gun deaths / total #deaths)? Or some kind of deaths-to-guns ratio? Or what? Thanks.

I find this thread an interesting addition to tenni's.

But Gen? Is it really in your interest to point out that there was massive slaughter in Uganda *before* guns were controlled? Any clue about whether the number went up or down since then? (it almost couldn't have gone up, given the statistics you cite)

[tenni]

Hi Annika
My understanding that it is total gun related deaths per capita. Firearm related death rate per 100, 000 population in one year (but not necessarily the same year as other countries reported) The years were mostly between 2000-2010. (one was 1994 as the only info for that country). This includes all gun related deaths: homicide, suicide, unintentional, and undetermined death by guns.

[voltaire]

Gen's "facts " about gun control are what we professional historians call "ahistorical" which is an inelegant way of saying that one is comparing apples to oranges. The various nation states listed had very different forms of access to guns at the public level. Also he ignores the clear statement in the 2nd amendment that the right to bear arms was a right of the states in support of state militias. (in fairness to him, 5 justices of the us supreme court got this wrong as well).

[Long Duck Dong]

as I sit reading this thread..... my mind goes over the last few weeks of the new year in NZ.... one shooting so far, a freak accident with a air rifle and a riccoheting pellet ....
and yes the usual "ban guns" cries have started by the anti gun, pro peace advocates....... where there is silence, is the guy beaten to death ( 5 people arrested ), the stabbing of a man ( one arrested ) the killing of a woman with a axe ( 2 arrested ).......and then there is the cop, attacked by a group of 5 people and beaten, yet people are talking about how wrong the cop was and how he was so heavy handed cos he pulled his gun when he was confronted and attacked...... however mention the cop attacked 24 hours before that, by a teen with a bayonet, and most people have NO idea what you are talking about .

it leaves me shaking my head and questioning the reality of some people..... it reads almost as if its ok for people to be beaten or killed, as long as a gun was not involved.....

[falcondfw]

As far as your opinion that a gun is a tool, that is true. Interesting that I don't hear people in my country making this type of connection with hammers, guns, etc. It reads as brainwashing to me and a justification/rationalization by people who want their country to have increasing gun violence rather than merely factual.

As far as documented instances in which an armed citizen prevented a violent crime, it reads to me as a very violent culture rather than preventative. Historically, your country has been a very violent invasive culture. Which other countries track guns as preventative to violent crimes?

More than 500,000 people died from gun violence in Brazil between 1979 and 2003. Studies show a strong, inverse relationship between homicide rates and both economic development and economic equality.

Gender differences (of violence) are least marked for children. For the 15 to 29 age group, male rates (of violence) were nearly six times those for female rates; for the remaining age groups, male rates were from two to four times those for females.

And if a gunman broke into your home and was threatening your wife and kids, how would you defend them? Say "Oh pretty please, Mr. Gunman. Don't hurt them."?

[falcondfw]

Quite a lot.. many gay and bisexual people have had their lives ended by shooting... as a community, we are part of this world, and what goes on in it affects the lgbt just as it does any other group of people... we should never be so insular as to think what goes on in the big bad world is of no interest to us, neither should we show ourselves ignorant of it. We are first and foremost human beings.. what goes on around us affects us.. and if we are to be treated seriously as a group of people, we should show the world that we care for that world, for our fellow human beings and for life on this planet.. that we think a little more than about simply the bits we have between our legs and what and whom we can do with them .. fail to do that and those who would return us to the oblivion of the closet, the travails of repression and remove from us the right to be, to love and desire who we will, as they do, shall feel themselves well satisfied that we have proven ourselves as nothing but the perversions that they claim us to be, interested in nothing but the perversions that they claim of us and will have surrendered our right to be considered equal to them in this world, also our basic humanity and our right to be considered compassionate and.decent human beings... we are more than sex, more than our sexuality.. these are but a small part of us.. we are human beings who live on this earth.. that is why we debate issues such as this...

And many more have had their lives ended by stabbing or a car wreck. Should we ban knives and cars, as well?

[falcondfw]

Hi Annika
My understanding that it is total gun related deaths per capita. Firearm related death rate per 100, 000 population in one year (but not necessarily the same year as other countries reported) The years were mostly between 2000-2010. (one was 1994 as the only info for that country). This includes all gun related deaths: homicide, suicide, unintentional, and undetermined death by guns.

Well, then isn't that kinda like comparing apples to oranges? Populations in most countries rise from year to year. The rates of death by gun could go down if we were comparing the same years, because of a population increase. Or is this just more "let's find statistics that show America in a bad light and rip `em a new one."?

[gladius]

And many more have had their lives ended by stabbing or a car wreck. Should we ban knives and cars, as well?

Falcon, I don't think Fran was defending one form of weapon over another, as it pertained to her response. I do believe that she was stating that as a "community" the same feelings of violance are shared, as a community.

[falcondfw]

Falcon, I don't think Fran was defending one form of weapon over another, as it pertained to her response. I do believe that she was stating that as a "community" the same feelings of violance are shared, as a community.

I understand that. I am more referring to people's reactions to this whole issue. The gun didn't pull its own trigger. The same way the knife didn't stab someone by itself and the car didn't drive itself over people (aside from the Steven King book and movie Christine). Yet here people are, blaming the gun. If they are going to do that, then they should be consistent and blame the knife and the car and the fertilizer (Oklahoma City) and the Planes (9/11).
And yes, I realize that is ridiculous. I am doing it to make a point. If we are going to be ridiculous and blame the guns, we should be equally and consistently as ridiculous and blame the other things and ban them as well.

[tenni]

And if a gunman broke into your home and was threatening your wife and kids, how would you defend them? Say "Oh pretty please, Mr. Gunman. Don't hurt them."?

In Canada few B&E have a gun involved. There are some deaths due to B&E without guns but I suspect that the numbers are far fewer than the US. Gun deaths due to B&E are also not that much on the minds of most people in Canada. That would vary in communities where there are a lot of illegal guns though. Illegal use of guns seem to happen more frequently in gang shootings.


Well, then isn't that kinda like comparing apples to oranges? Populations in most countries rise from year to year. The rates of death by gun could go down if we were comparing the same years, because of a population increase. Or is this just more "let's find statistics that show America in a bad light and rip `em a new one."?

The use of per capita ie for each 100 000 people evens out the comparison from country to country regardless of their population.

Number of gun deaths may go up and down but this reporting with countries ranking as listed has been fairly consistent over ten years plus. The stats are not about the US but the world stats on gun deaths and guns in the country.

It happens that the US falls within higher placement in the issue of gun deaths. It happens that the US has the most guns per 100 000 people of the population compared to other countries. The US (88,800 per 100, 000 citizens) has nearly twice the numbers of gun owners than Switzerland (45,700 per 100, 000 citizens). The US (88,800 per 100,000 citizens) compared to second place Serbia (58,200 per 100,000 citizens) As some people may possess multiple weapons while others possess none, this number is not a representation of the percentage of people who possess guns in each country.

[Long Duck Dong]

Well, then isn't that kinda like comparing apples to oranges? Populations in most countries rise from year to year. The rates of death by gun could go down if we were comparing the same years, because of a population increase. Or is this just more "let's find statistics that show America in a bad light and rip `em a new one."?

this is a breakdown by country that I did in another thread..... the figures are more up to date and accurate as most of the numbers used are more up to date numbers....
http://www.gunpolicy.org/ is the site used for all of the following numbers......
the numbers do not reflect the fact that some shootings can be multiple victim homicide / suicides committed by one person.... and therefore the stats only give a limited overview......



http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/switzerland
the swiss have 8 mill population, 3.8 mill guns estimated, the homicide rate non gun (53 ) is near equal to the homicide with a gun rate ( 50 approx ).... their non gun suicide rate ( 1313 ) is 5x the suicide by gun rate ( 239 )..... switzerland has very loose gun control laws, and a military service policy.....

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/new-zealand
NZ has 4.3 ( roughly ) mill people, 925,000 guns, the homicide rate non gun ( 134) is 11 times higher than homicide rate by gun ( 11 ) we have a non gun suicide rate ( 510 ) that is 10x our suicide by gun rate ( 47 ) and we have strict multi level gun control laws and no military service policy.....


http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
the US has 313 mill people, 270 mill guns in private ownership ( estimated ) the homicide rate non gun ( 14,159 ) is just under 1.5x higher than the homicide rate by gun ( 9,146 ) a non gun suicide rate ( 32,559 ) that is near 2 x the gun suicide rate ( 17,002 ) the us has multi state ownership laws that vary and no military service policy

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-kingdom
the uk has 62 mill people, 4 mill guns in private ownership ( estimated ) the homicide rate non gun ( 724 ) is 40x higher than the homicide rate by gun ( 18 ) a non gun suicide rate ( 4,448 ) that is 41x higher than the gun suicide rate ( 101 ) the UK has multi state ownership laws that vary and no military service policy

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/canada
canada has 35 mill people, 9.9 mill guns in private ownership ( estimated ) the homicide rate non gun ( 610 ) is 3.5 times higher than the gun homicide rate by gun ( 173 ) a non gun suicide rate (3,611 ) that is 6 times higher than the gun suicide rate ( 586 ) canada has multi state ownership laws that vary and no military service policy

[tenni]

"canada has 35 mill people, 9.9 mill guns in private ownership ( estimated ) the homicide rate non gun ( 610 ) is 3.5 times higher than the gun homicide rate by gun ( 173 ) a non gun suicide rate (3,611 ) that is 6 times higher than the gun suicide rate ( 586 ) canada has multi state ownership laws that vary and no military service policy"

I suspect that the above 2009 /below 2011 may be slightly off topic but below shows how Canada's gun laws have made a different environment than the cuz'n below us..

Some of the stats above are inaccurate based on the most recent reports which are for 2011 and released in December 2012. The entire homicide deaths in 2011 was 598 which was a spike of 7% (44 homicides) from 2010(which was less than 2009). The homicide rate has been declining since the 1970. Gun homicides are down and knife homicides are up but up until 2011 declining.

Gun homicide rates in Canada have been in steady decline since the 1970's.

Overall in 2011, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cent.

Gang homicides increased steadily from the early 1990s until 2008, before declining in both 2009 and 2010.

Victims typically know their killer. Among solved homicides in 2011, almost half were committed by an acquaintance or friend, one-third by a family member and only 15 per cent by a stranger. (therefore less fear of home invasion murders than some posting on this site from the US.)

The rate of intimate partner homicides committed against females increased by 19 per cent in 2011 compared to 2010, the third increase in four years. The rate for male victims declined by almost half compared to 2010, hitting the lowest point since data collection began in 1961.

I believe that the one of the largest/shocking murders was an "honour killing" by drowning in a car of three females in 2011. Two daughters and a "first" wife killed by a man, his second wife(poly and their son..killing his sisters and the first wife of the man).

[Long Duck Dong]

"canada has 35 mill people, 9.9 mill guns in private ownership ( estimated ) the homicide rate non gun ( 610 ) is 3.5 times higher than the gun homicide rate by gun ( 173 ) a non gun suicide rate (3,611 ) that is 6 times higher than the gun suicide rate ( 586 ) canada has multi state ownership laws that vary and no military service policy"

Some of the stats above are inaccurate based on the most recent reports which are for 2011 and released in December 2012. The entire homicide deaths in 2011 was 598 which was a spike of 7% from 2010(which was less than 2009). The homicide rate has been declining since the 1970. Gun homicides are down and knife homicides are up but up until 2011 declining. Gun homicide rates have been in steady decline since the 1970's.

Overall in 2011, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cent.

Gang homicides increased steadily from the early 1990s until 2008, before declining in both 2009 and 2010.

Victims typically know their killer. Among solved homicides in 2011, almost half were committed by an acquaintance or friend, one-third by a family member and only 15 per cent by a stranger. (therefore less fear of home invasion murders than some posting on this site from the US.)

The rate of intimate partner homicides committed against females increased by 19 per cent in 2011, the third increase in four years. The rate for male victims declined by almost half, hitting the lowest point since data collection began in 1961.


the numbers i used were for the year 2009, as the 2011 stats were not available for some aspects and countries, including canada.....


now what you post is interesting.....ans most of what you post, brings me to a news paper article......

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html
Homicide rates in Canada rise 7%


Firearm deaths at lowest level in almost 50 years as killers favour the blade



An increase in stabbings accounted for virtually the entire increase in homicides in 2011," the federal data agency said.
It said there were 39 more stabbings in 2011 compared to 2010. Overall, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cent.
Overall, the homicide rate was 1.73 per 100,000 population in 2011, seven per cent higher than in 2010, Statistics Canada said.


almost forgot..... in terms of shocking and largest murders in canada...... robert pickton,.....

[gen11]

Voltaire: I don't know of you're speaking the truth about being a "professional historian" or not, but IF you are, you're flat-ass LYING about the intent of the Second Amendment. When asked who was meant by "the militia," George Mason, a co-author of the amendment, replied "everybody."

Further, contrary to the claims of one of us who could be assumed to be an authority, the last two time the Supreme Court has addressed the issue of private gun ownership, it has UPHELD the position that the Second Amendment applies to individual citizens.

Your charge of the examples being "ahistorical" -- whatever that is -- through being applies and oranges, is a conclusion you, as an individual, are free to draw. The fact remains that firearems were banned in those countries in those years, and the atrocities did follow after in time sequence. Conjunction in time does not prove cause-and-effect, true. Circumstances were different, true. I'm surprised that you didn't cite Great Britian as a nation that has banned guns but not suffered a mass extinction. Still. . . . the bannings cited were followed by the mass extinctions. And lately "historians" have rewritten history to support their personal political, social, or philosophical beliefs or wishes, making them profound hypocrites and liars.

[tenni]

LDD
What you mention regarding the gun murders being at a 50 year low and the reference to knifing murders increasing has to do with the percentages and not the total murders. A fifty year lowering of homicides showed a change in the tool used to kill.

Total murders and gun murders have been steadily reducing since 1970's. If a murderer does not have ready access to guns he /she turns to other methods such as a knife, strangulation, beating with hands. The argument about a gun being a tool not much different that a hammer being a tool loses its strength when examining the Canadian historical statistics. People die at a higher incidence if a gun is used than if a knife or hammer/hands/drowning is used. Therefore the murder rates go down when guns are not used. This is what may be interpreted from the historical homicides in Canada. What is missing though is the number of assaults with the use of guns compared to hands or knifes and whether the person lives or dies at a greater percentage with different methods of assault. I think that I saw that somewhere though.

Your reference to Robert Picton is a horrific serial killer but his method and tools are unclear as best as I've read. His murders were not recent either.(arrested in 2002) In the Robert Picton murders, the serial killer (not mass murderer) killed the Indigenous female prostitutes in a possible number of ways over a period of several years (may be ten?). He disclosed to an undercover police that he strangled them with his hands and wire. He was on a pig farm that rendered the meat. A rifle would be used to kill pigs as a pig farmer. A rifle was found with a dildo attached to it. Some of the testimony has not been readily presented in public out of respect for the victims' families. Not all of the 49 victims had their day in court and I don't know if it has ever been reported what he did with the farm rifle with the dildo attached. Your imagination can fill in the blanks and mine doesn't create a very humane way to die. He is a butcher quite literally with his victims. He rendered their bodies and the victims were identified by DNA from small pieces of flesh that were found all over the farm. (heads and hands were found in freezers) This was discovered in 2002 and public inquiries have just reported the failures of the BC police. We just don't know which method of murder predominated his murder practice...guns or hands.

[falcondfw]

In Canada few B&E have a gun involved. There are some deaths due to B&E without guns but I suspect that the numbers are far fewer than the US. Gun deaths due to B&E are also not that much on the minds of most people in Canada. That would vary in communities where there are a lot of illegal guns though. Illegal use of guns seem to happen more frequently in gang shootings.



Tenni, that was not an answer to my question, now was it? My question was, if a gunman breaks into your home, what are you going to do to protect your family, say "Oh please, mr. gunman, pretty please don't hurt them."?

[havefun529]

Apparently armed guards did work. President Reagan survived and the gunman was captured. Too bad the children in CT didn't have the same protection.

[tenni]

Tenni, that was not an answer to my question, now was it? My question was, if a gunman breaks into your home, what are you going to do to protect your family, say "Oh please, mr. gunman, pretty please don't hurt them."?

I really don't know falcon. As I pointed out with Canadian historical facts the chances of that happening are not impossible but so highly unlikely that I and many Canucks do not feel any concern to contemplate your concern. If you were safe and gun homicides are reducing for more than forty years what would you do? Would you still worry about needing a gun? One preventative thing was to have security alarm systems.

Falcon
What are the historical facts over the past ten years that you have had a home invasion and the robber had a gun? How many times has this happened on the street where you live?

havefun Point taken as far as survival. Mr Brady was less fortunate than President Reagan even with all of those guns they could not prevent the shooting though. John Kennedy was less fortunate. It seems like you would need a lot of guards per classroom to match Reagans ratio of guards /person. I guess the guards could tutor kids when not shooting. ;) There just would not be space for the usual number of students per class as the guards would be taking up all the room. Still the kids could get shot in the cross fire.

[voltaire]

gen,

I typed out a response and it keeps getting lost when I post. It's not worth re-typing a third time so I will just note that I am not lying about anything. Your quote from George Mason is off..he did not say the militia was "everyone" but the "whole people" but of course this did not mean balcks or women, etc. That does not mena that he did not consider the state militia as a counterweight to the federal army. Most founders had a distrust of standing armies.

I've read the Heller decision...every word. Have you? The Supreme Court did say that the 2nd amend. is an individual right but my point was that the decision was an intellectually dishonest one, and not supported by the historical record. It is the law now that the 2nd Amendment is a personal right, contrary to the Court's prior holding in 1939. but that does not mean that is a good decision. See e.g Dredd Scott, or Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), now overruled by Texas v. Johnson. Until Johnson, you were a criminal under state law everytime you engaged in gay sex. And an "unnatural" one at that.

Re the list of countries, I can speak for the european ones. Germany, for example, was rounding up Jews as early as 1934 thanks to the racial purity laws of 1934. I'm going to check and see what german law occurred in 1938 -- if there even was one.

You are a smart and logical person...usually. Note that I am not calling you a liar. But I do think you are basing your argument on faulty facts. Also, Heller does not say that all laws concerning guns are automatically void. Read the opinion. However, it may be too late to have effective gun regulation with literally millions of guns in this country. I just hope that none of your friends are ever murdered or wounded like some of mine have been.

it was nice knowing you and I enjoyed our chats

[elian]

My big concern is that it adds fuel to the fire while really doing nothing to fix a broken society. If you want sanity you should invest in proper mental health care and social programs. I am convinced that this can be done is such a way as not to make it seem like a "hand-out". The local coroner here noted that most of the deaths he's seen last year involved the use of handguns, not assault weapons. He suggested that the proper approach to start solving the problem is for each family to have a frank discussion about morals and respect.

I really do advocate peace, and I think the hard core pro-gun lobby is just as bad in terms of fanning the flames but it was downright painful to watch the president on the television today hugging children and pretending that this is actually going to do anything to solve the root cause of the issue.

I honestly would like to believe that if James Holmes couldn't buy assault weapons that maybe more people would be alive in Colorado but again this doesn't solve the real problem - that a lot of people are hurting in our country right now. When they feel that their lives are worthless they've got nothing left to lose.. I don't know if there is anything that will fix the way people "feel" about themselves..no easy solution.

Apparently something must finally be sinking in because James Holmes also tried to commit suicide in jail. Whether or not he actually feels remorse or just fear I cannot tell.

I do believe this is an LGBT issue in a roundabout way only on the grounds that when I say our society needs to be "healthy" I don't want some other person to point the finger at LGBT folks as an example of the so called "moral decay".

[Long Duck Dong]

LDD
What you mention regarding the gun murders being at a 50 year low and the reference to knifing murders increasing has to do with the percentages and not the total murders. A fifty year lowering of homicides showed a change in the tool used to kill.

Total murders and gun murders have been steadily reducing since 1970's. If a murderer does not have ready access to guns he /she turns to other methods such as a knife, strangulation, beating with hands. The argument about a gun being a tool not much different that a hammer being a tool loses its strength when examining the Canadian historical statistics. People die at a higher incidence if a gun is used than if a knife or hammer/hands/drowning is used. Therefore the murder rates go down when guns are not used. This is what may be interpreted from the historical homicides in Canada. What is missing though is the number of assaults with the use of guns compared to hands or knifes and whether the person lives or dies at a greater percentage with different methods of assault. I think that I saw that somewhere though.

Your reference to Robert Picton is a horrific serial killer but his method and tools are unclear as best as I've read. His murders were not recent either.(arrested in 2002) In the Robert Picton murders, the serial killer (not mass murderer) killed the Indigenous female prostitutes in a possible number of ways over a period of several years (may be ten?). He disclosed to an undercover police that he strangled them with his hands and wire. He was on a pig farm that rendered the meat. A rifle would be used to kill pigs as a pig farmer. A rifle was found with a dildo attached to it. Some of the testimony has not been readily presented in public out of respect for the victims' families. Not all of the 49 victims had their day in court and I don't know if it has ever been reported what he did with the farm rifle with the dildo attached. Your imagination can fill in the blanks and mine doesn't create a very humane way to die. He is a butcher quite literally with his victims. He rendered their bodies and the victims were identified by DNA from small pieces of flesh that were found all over the farm. (heads and hands were found in freezers) This was discovered in 2002 and public inquiries have just reported the failures of the BC police. We just don't know which method of murder predominated his murder practice...guns or hands.



sorry, what I wrote ????... don't you mean what I was questioning about what you posted, so again I will post the article that you borrowed heavily from, the part in red, is possibly the only part of the article that you left intact when you copied and pasted chucks of the article then changed them around to give a better look to your rant

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html

The number of homicides in Canada rose to 598 in 2011, 44 more than the previous year, marking the first increase in three years, according to data released today.
Statistics Canada reported Tuesday that the homicide rate has stayed "relatively stable over the past decade." Prior to that, it had been declining since the mid-1970s.
However, deaths related to firearms aren't nearly as common, the federal agency said.
The Canadian murder weapon of choice is now the blade."The rate of firearm homicides per 100,000 population has generally been declining since the mid-1970s and, in 2011, reached its lowest point in almost 50 years."
"An increase in stabbings accounted for virtually the entire increase in homicides in 2011," the federal data agency said.
It said there were 39 more stabbings in 2011 compared to 2010. Overall, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cent.


btw the argument that you are trying to use as proof of gun control etc... is the same thing that the pro gun ownerships have been saying the whole time..... take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....

[DuckiesDarling]

Reading this thread and just shaking my head........... what difference does it make if it's a mass murder or spree killing or over the years serial killer? Loss of life is still loss of life. And it's been proven if people don't have access to a gun they will use something else..... knives, bats, hands, cars, poison, planes... .the list is endless. Guns are a tool, people are just not getting that fact, they are a tool... most any tool can be used to murder another person if you are dedicated enough to do so.

Another thing people are just not understanding.... you can pass all the laws you want.. makes not one bit of difference to the criminal, think about it.

[falcondfw]

btw the argument that you are trying to use as proof of gun control etc... is the same thing that the pro gun ownerships have been saying the whole time..... take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....


AMEN!


Another thing people are just not understanding.... you can pass all the laws you want.. makes not one bit of difference to the criminal, think about it.

DOUBLE AMEN!!

[gladius]

Reading this thread and just shaking my head........... what difference does it make if it's a mass murder or spree killing or over the years serial killer? Loss of life is still loss of life. And it's been proven if people don't have access to a gun they will use something else..... knives, bats, hands, cars, poison, planes... .the list is endless. Guns are a tool, people are just not getting that fact, they are a tool... most any tool can be used to murder another person if you are dedicated enough to do so.

Another thing people are just not understanding.... you can pass all the laws you want.. makes not one bit of difference to the criminal, think about it.

Outside of combat action, I chose NOT to beat two men to death, with my hands.

[12voltman59]

My only response to this thread is that unless you are fighting a war or in law enforcement----the average person has no goddamned reason on God's Green Earth to have a WEAPON like a Bushmaster or the civilian version of an M-4 or AK-47, nor do they have need of large capacity ammo magazines and to put reasonable restrictions on people like no "straw man" WEAPONS purchases, no loop holes for background checks at gun shows among "private parties" and shit like that is not going to "restrict freedoms."

When you are in the military---at least like I was when I was in the Coast Guard where that service has not only has a military aspect, but federal civilian law enforcement duties and responsiblities----to continue to be qualified to carry WEAPONS--not only must you periodically prove you have the most basic technical skills in operating the WEAPONS in the proper fashion--almost more importantly than that----you have to undergo continual tests to prove you have the proper state of mind and wise judgement to use a WEAPON in an act of deadly force via taking part in "Shoot, Don't Shoot" training scenarios---the same goes when in civilian law enforcement--which I had to do for both the Florida Department of Corrections and under the auspices of the state parole authority in Ohio and the local Sheriff's Department since I was armed when I worked for both the Florida DOC and for the Courts in Ohio.

It is crazy that just about anyone, as long as you have the money basically and don't have a felony conviction--or you engage in an "off the books" WEAPONS purchase---you can pretty much have your own personal arsenal---all without undergoing one whit of basic firearms/WEAPONS training from the purely technical side and surely you do not have to take and pass, some form of "Shoot, Don't Shoot" training.

When it comes to WEAPONS---I am so fucking tired of that bullshit line of the NRA that "guns don't kill people---people kill people." That is only true to a certain fucking point--but as yet---I have yet to hear that some guns and ammo got together and decided---"Hey guys---its a good day for us to join up and go down to the local mall, movie theater or school and shoot the fuck out of the place"--the guns and ammo just don't do that on their own--it takes some sick fuck to pack them up, transport them and go make a innocent place a killing field---thanks to the efficiency of our modern assault WEAPONS and ammo---with them having one purpose and one purpose only----to effectively and efficiently kill as many people as possible.

Assault WEAPONS are not good for any other purpose other than mass destruction, but sure--some sick fuck can go and take a bunch of baseball bats, crowbars, maybe some knives and machetes with him---and go to a school and maybe kill a few people if he is lucky---but he cannot commit mass slaughter.

It is not going to be the end of the fucking world if some REASONABLE and RATIONAL "gun control" measures---even banning ASSAULT WEAPONS gets put into effect, are not going to pose a great threat to democracy and by doing so--- this just might reduce some of the needless and mindless slaughter that some of our most sick bastards seem intent on perpetuating that they could not do by any other means other than using high powered, ASSAULT WEAPONS and packing in boatloads of high powered ammo when they go to their chosen locale to do their dirty and deadly work---I think that if a person only is packing some baseball bats or some knives---the wussy factor settles in and they won't do as much of this sort of thing--but carrying in a few assault WEAPONS either hand or rifle----and hundreds of rounds of ammo---makes them feel they are almost godlike and invincible--which of course---they basically are godlike when they carry so many WEAPONS and ammo with them!!!

[gladius]

My only response to this thread is that unless you are fighting a war or in law enforcement----the average person has no goddamned reason on God's Green Earth to have a WEAPON like a Bushmaster or the civilian version of an M-4 or AK-47, nor do they have need of large capacity ammo magazines and to put reasonable restrictions on people like no "straw man" WEAPONS purchases, no loop holes for background checks at gun shows among "private parties" and shit like that is not going to "restrict freedoms."

When you are in the military---at least like I was when I was in the Coast Guard where that service has not only has a military aspect, but federal civilian law enforcement duties and responsiblities----to continue to be qualified to carry WEAPONS--not only must you periodically prove you have the most basic technical skills in operating the WEAPONS in the proper fashion--almost more importantly than that----you have to undergo continual tests to prove you have the proper state of mind and wise judgement to use a WEAPON in an act of deadly force via taking part in "Shoot, Don't Shoot" training scenarios---the same goes when in civilian law enforcement--which I had to do for both the Florida Department of Corrections and under the auspices of the state parole authority in Ohio and the local Sheriff's Department since I was armed when I worked for both the Florida DOC and for the Courts in Ohio.

It is crazy that just about anyone, as long as you have the money basically and don't have a felony conviction--or you engage in an "off the books" WEAPONS purchase---you can pretty much have your own personal arsenal---all without undergoing one whit of basic firearms/WEAPONS training from the purely technical side and surely you do not have to take and pass, some form of "Shoot, Don't Shoot" training.

When it comes to WEAPONS---I am so fucking tired of that bullshit line of the NRA that "guns don't kill people---people kill people." That is only true to a certain fucking point--but as yet---I have yet to hear that some guns and ammo got together and decided---"Hey guys---its a good day for us to join up and go down to the local mall, movie theater or school and shoot the fuck out of the place"--the guns and ammo just don't do that on their own--it takes some sick fuck to pack them up, transport them and go make a innocent place a killing field---thanks to the efficiency of our modern assault WEAPONS and ammo---with them having one purpose and one purpose only----to effectively and efficiently kill as many people as possible.

Assault WEAPONS are not good for any other purpose other than mass destruction, but sure--some sick fuck can go and take a bunch of baseball bats, crowbars, maybe some knives and machetes with him---and go to a school and maybe kill a few people if he is lucky---but he cannot commit mass slaughter.

It is not going to be the end of the fucking world if some REASONABLE and RATIONAL "gun control" measures---even banning ASSAULT WEAPONS gets put into effect, are not going to pose a great threat to democracy and by doing so--- this just might reduce some of the needless and mindless slaughter that some of our most sick bastards seem intent on perpetuating that they could not do by any other means other than using high powered, ASSAULT WEAPONS and packing in boatloads of high powered ammo when they go to their chosen locale to do their dirty and deadly work---I think that if a person only is packing some baseball bats or some knives---the wussy factor settles in and they won't do as much of this sort of thing--but carrying in a few assault WEAPONS either hand or rifle----and hundreds of rounds of ammo---makes them feel they are almost godlike and invincible--which of course---they basically are godlike when they carry so many WEAPONS and ammo with them!!!

And so you spoke. Now, please, sit back down.

[chook]

Outside of combat action, I chose NOT to beat two men to death, with my hands.

Be serious you clown.....you couldnt beat an egg let alone two men

Chook

[falcondfw]

My only response to this thread is that unless you are fighting a war or in law enforcement----the average person has no goddamned reason on God's Green Earth to have a WEAPON like a Bushmaster or the civilian version of an M-4 or AK-47, nor do they have need of large capacity ammo magazines and to put reasonable restrictions on people like no "straw man" WEAPONS purchases, no loop holes for background checks at gun shows among "private parties" and shit like that is not going to "restrict freedoms."

When you are in the military---at least like I was when I was in the Coast Guard where that service has not only has a military aspect, but federal civilian law enforcement duties and responsiblities----to continue to be qualified to carry WEAPONS--not only must you periodically prove you have the most basic technical skills in operating the WEAPONS in the proper fashion--almost more importantly than that----you have to undergo continual tests to prove you have the proper state of mind and wise judgement to use a WEAPON in an act of deadly force via taking part in "Shoot, Don't Shoot" training scenarios---the same goes when in civilian law enforcement--which I had to do for both the Florida Department of Corrections and under the auspices of the state parole authority in Ohio and the local Sheriff's Department since I was armed when I worked for both the Florida DOC and for the Courts in Ohio.

It is crazy that just about anyone, as long as you have the money basically and don't have a felony conviction--or you engage in an "off the books" WEAPONS purchase---you can pretty much have your own personal arsenal---all without undergoing one whit of basic firearms/WEAPONS training from the purely technical side and surely you do not have to take and pass, some form of "Shoot, Don't Shoot" training.

When it comes to WEAPONS---I am so fucking tired of that bullshit line of the NRA that "guns don't kill people---people kill people." That is only true to a certain fucking point--but as yet---I have yet to hear that some guns and ammo got together and decided---"Hey guys---its a good day for us to join up and go down to the local mall, movie theater or school and shoot the fuck out of the place"--the guns and ammo just don't do that on their own--it takes some sick fuck to pack them up, transport them and go make a innocent place a killing field---thanks to the efficiency of our modern assault WEAPONS and ammo---with them having one purpose and one purpose only----to effectively and efficiently kill as many people as possible.

Assault WEAPONS are not good for any other purpose other than mass destruction, but sure--some sick fuck can go and take a bunch of baseball bats, crowbars, maybe some knives and machetes with him---and go to a school and maybe kill a few people if he is lucky---but he cannot commit mass slaughter.

It is not going to be the end of the fucking world if some REASONABLE and RATIONAL "gun control" measures---even banning ASSAULT WEAPONS gets put into effect, are not going to pose a great threat to democracy and by doing so--- this just might reduce some of the needless and mindless slaughter that some of our most sick bastards seem intent on perpetuating that they could not do by any other means other than using high powered, ASSAULT WEAPONS and packing in boatloads of high powered ammo when they go to their chosen locale to do their dirty and deadly work---I think that if a person only is packing some baseball bats or some knives---the wussy factor settles in and they won't do as much of this sort of thing--but carrying in a few assault WEAPONS either hand or rifle----and hundreds of rounds of ammo---makes them feel they are almost godlike and invincible--which of course---they basically are godlike when they carry so many WEAPONS and ammo with them!!!

I have to ask. Have you even read the Constitution? Do you even know what that Oath you swore meant? Did you ever think if they ban magazines with more than 10 rounds that they will just buy 3 magazines? Come on. You can't be that dumb.

[elian]

Apparently one of the orders the president signed includes additional support for mental health care, the trouble is it is very hard to "institutionally" predict when a normal person is just going to snap.

The issue of self esteem and self worth is much more fundamental to the fabric of a healthy society and probably way more complex than I can imagine given all of the pressures a person feels from outside influences here. One thing I am sure of when I talk about raising self-esteem is not artificial coddling that inflates a person's ego that then comes crashing down when their balloon finally bursts but something more genuine..

Maybe that's why I write all these blog posts - because I definitely see something lacking, I felt it growing up too. I know it's naive to believe in a positive world and positive potential in the face of so much tragedy but that is how I've learned to cope with the world. I don't know how many ways I can say the same message but you can read it in almost all of my threads.

[gen11]

81 Countries with 100% firearms bans have higher murder rates than the United States, per the World Health Organization. That's a long list, but it is available and can be presented here in order, from Honduras at 91.6 murders per 100,000 citizens to Martinique, No. 82 on the list, at 4.2. The United States also has 4.2. It must be noted that most of the 81 are Third-World or "emerging" nations and that no European or British countries (not necessarily protectorates) made the list. It should also be noted that the WHO ranking includes muders by any means and does not differentiate for firearms vs other means.

I opened this tread with the comment "Form your own conclusions." Mine is that, among "civlilzed," "advanced" societies, the United States IS a violent society with a multiplicity of influences that produce an astoundingly high percentage of detached, narcissistic members, a few of which go the extreme of being mass murderers; but that firearms are only their tools and that the aforesaid influences are the problem that needs to be addressed, not only to reduce mass murders, but to prevent the entire American way of life from total collapse -- if it is not already too late. One inescapable conclusion to be drawn from a list of 81 nations with higher murder rates than ours DESPITE total firearms bans is that a murderer will find a means, including firearms, even if firearms are banned altogether. The US undeniably has a problem. Identifying it as the prevelence of firearms is a mortal distraction, a politically expedient political sop, that only enables our problem to intensify.

[darkeyes]

The US, like other countries will do what it does about guns.. that it refuses to learn from other countries is a part of its macho culture.. the reduction in murders and in most other forms of violent crime in my little neck of the woods is quite stark over the last decade.. even the fall in knife crime which still accounts for the largest share of homicides but it is nowhere near as bad as once and not so long ago at that.. the starkest statistic is that overwhelmingly victims are known to the killer.. this in itself does not invalidate claims by some who ask "what would u do if burglar attacked ur family?" but it does bring them into question. Burglars for a start do not tend to carry weapons of any description on their person while committing a crime.. it is not unknown but it is rare...

In Scotland as in the UK as a whole, murder by stranger is relatively a rare thing.. something close to half murders, copious quantities of alcohol are involved... God save us from the piss-head with a gun!! It happens but very very rarely.. most killings are spontaneous, many unintended, as a result of fights.. not from criminals breaking into homes or threatening citizens elsewhere.. weapons of any description turn people into criminals.. they are tools, but tools which create a mind set and so create the real possibility of violence where violence would not otherwise occur, or if it did, it would be far less serious and far less fatal.. u pays ur money and u makes ur choice... we have firearms control which is very tight.. it is not rigid however, and allows for people to hold firearms under licence in certain circumstances for certain purposes..

We do not have a firearm culture; carrying firearms willy nilly about with us is not something which is allowed.. and people do not fear the state sufficiently that many feel the need to retain huge stores of guns to defend against it.. it is in large part a matter of attitude... if we believe something bad enough it is likely to be, and we are likely to create the conditions where our negative beliefs and emotions will become reality.. and where it is already reality attitude and fear will perpetuate and even worsen that reality.. we learn or we allow things to be as they are.. we try new things or we stay rooted in the past.. we study other cultures and take the best from them if they are of benefit to our own society.. sadly, the US, or at least huge swathes of its population in their arrogance refuse either to learn or to believe that there may be another way... I am not so arrogant as to claim that what my country does is right for the US or is the best way any country has ever devised to cut violent crime, but I do believe its achievements of the last decade or so have lessons for the US and other places.. just as the US and other places in many ways have lessons for us to consider and that all too often we do not learn those lessons... the US has many lessons to teach us about firearms and fighting crime, and we learn them.. which is why as a society we have rejected the right to bear arms and have serious and strict gun control...

You may read this and draw ur own conclusions and u can reject how in this country we view firearms but it has lessons if u wish to learn them.. it does however depend on the lesson u wish to learn...http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-20219375

[tenni]

"81 Countries with 100% firearms bans have higher murder rates than the United States, per the World Health Organization. That's a long list, but it is available and can be presented here in order, from Honduras at 91.6 murders per 100,000 citizens to Martinique, No. 82 on the list, at 4.2. The United States also has 4.2. It must be noted that most of the 81 are Third-World or "emerging" nations and that no European or British countries (not necessarily protectorates) made the list. It should also be noted that the WHO ranking includes muders by any means and does not differentiate for firearms vs other means."

Considering that there are only 196 countries in the world, that is a stating that 45% of all the countries in the world have banned guns and have a higher murder rate than the US.

Would you please post the source of this information?

"take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....

Knife homicide rates increased but the total deaths decreased continually since the mid 1970.

If there are 100 homicides in 1970 and 60 are by the use of a gun while 25 are by knives.(that means 60% gun homicides and 25% by knives.

If there is a 40% reduction in homicides in 2000 compared to 1970 that means that there was 60 (100-40=60) total homicides in 2000.
If there was not a reduced rate of gun deaths that would mean, 60% of 60= 36 gun murders compared to 1970 of 60 gun murders. (24 fewer gun murders) BUT there was a reduction in gun homicides.

knives rate 25% of 60 = 15 murders by use of a knife compared to 1970’s 25(ten fewer knife murders).

Now, if there was an increase of rates for knife murders say a 10% increase that makes it 25+10=30% of total murders were by knives. That means 30% of 60 =18 knife murders but in 1970 there was 25. That is still a reduction of 7 knife murders when comparing the two eras.(even with the rate increase the numbers of murders are fewer)

[gladius]

Be serious you clown.....you couldnt beat an egg let alone two men

Chook

Awww, Chookie, I don't know what to say.

[falcondfw]

The US, like other countries will do what it does about guns.. that it refuses to learn from other countries is a part of its macho culture.. the reduction in murders and in most other forms of violent crime in my little neck of the woods is quite stark over the last decade.. even the fall in knife crime which still accounts for the largest share of homicides but it is nowhere near as bad as once and not so long ago at that.. the starkest statistic is that overwhelmingly victims are known to the killer.. this in itself does not invalidate claims by some who ask "what would u do if burglar attacked ur family?" but it does bring them into question. Burglars for a start do not tend to carry weapons of any description on their person while committing a crime.. it is not unknown but it is rare...


I would like to see proof of that claim. I don't buy it. While the drop in the violent crime rate in Scotland is definitely impressive, it still doesn't say how many burglars and rapists, of those caught, were armed.


I am not so arrogant as to claim that what my country does is right for the US or is the best way any country has ever devised to cut violent crime, but I do believe its achievements of the last decade or so have lessons for the US and other places..

Fran, I love ya, but you're kinda talking out of both sides of your mouth here.

[Long Duck Dong]

"take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....

Knife homicide rates increased but the total deaths decreased continually since the mid 1970.

If there are 100 homicides in 1970 and 60 are by the use of a gun while 25 are by knives.(that means 60% gun homicides and 25% by knives.

If there is a 40% reduction in homicides in 2000 compared to 1970 that means that there was 60 (100-40=60) total homicides in 2000.
If there was not a reduced rate of gun deaths that would mean, 60% of 60= 36 gun murders compared to 1970 of 60 gun murders. (24 fewer gun murders) BUT there was a reduction in gun homicides.

knives rate 25% of 60 = 15 murders by use of a knife compared to 1970’s 25(ten fewer knife murders).

Now, if there was an increase of rates for knife murders say a 10% increase that makes it 25+10=30% of total murders were by knives. That means 30% of 60 =18 knife murders but in 1970 there was 25. That is still a reduction of 7 knife murders when comparing the two eras.(even with the rate increase the numbers of murders are fewer)





roflmao and you think that gun owners are raving lunatics ???? where are the numbers to support what you are saying, tenni and the links to the homicide by year stats for 1970-2011....

while you are at it.... these numbers draw into question, what you are saying.... yet again

http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=57


now that site shows what was reported in the other article that you also twisted around in order to misrepresent facts.....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...nada-2011.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html)



The number of homicides in Canada rose to 598 in 2011, 44 more than the previous year, marking the first increase in three years, according to data released today.
Statistics Canada reported Tuesday that the homicide rate has stayed "relatively stable over the past decade." Prior to that, it had been declining since the mid-1970s.
However, deaths related to firearms aren't nearly as common, the federal agency said.
The Canadian murder weapon of choice is now the blade."The rate of firearm homicides per 100,000 population has generally been declining since the mid-1970s and, in 2011, reached its lowest point in almost 50 years."
"An increase in stabbings accounted for virtually the entire increase in homicides in 2011," the federal data agency said.
It said there were 39 more stabbings in 2011 compared to 2010. Overall, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cen

[gladius]

"take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....

I'm hoping you're not the idiot with the knife.

[Buck Naked]

As a Texas CHL holder I never leave home unarmed. I feel that an armed society is a polite society and when seconds count, the police are minutes away. I'm reminded of the joke where a police officer has pulled over an elderly lady and she gives him her drivers license and her CHL. The policeman asks if she is armed and she states, "Well yes I have a 9mm in the glove box." He asks if she has any other weapons and she says, "Yes, there is a 357 revolver under the seat. He asks if that is all the weapons and she says that there is Glock 40 in the console. Surprised by the number of weapons she has declared he asks, "Mam, what the heck are you afraid of?" and she answers "Not a damned thing!"

Here's a couple of links which pretty well spell out where I stand on this issue:

http://townhall.com/columnists/ashleyherzog/2013/01/04/good-guys-with-guns-n1479114/page/full/

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/important-gun-violence-video-to-share-with-friends/

[Long Duck Dong]

Burglars for a start do not tend to carry weapons of any description on their person while committing a crime.. it is not unknown but it is rare...



http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt ( this is the txt only link )


http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf ( full PDF version with tables )


*Simple assault (15%) was the most common form of violence whena resident was home and violence occurred. Robbery (7%) andrape (3%) were less likely to occur when a household member waspresent and violence occurred.*Offenders were known to their victims in 65% of violentburglaries; offenders were strangers in 28%. *Overall, 61% of offenders were unarmed when violence occurredduring a burglary while a resident was present. About 12% ofall households violently burglarized while someone was homefaced an offender armed with a firearm.*Simple assault (15%) was the most common form of violence when
a resident was home and violence occurred. Robbery (7%) and
rape (3%) were less likely to occur when a household member was
present and violence occurred.


*Offenders were known to their victims in 65% of violent
burglaries; offenders were strangers in 28%.


*Overall, 61% of offenders were unarmed when violence occurred
during a burglary while a resident was present. About 12% of
all households violently burglarized while someone was home
faced an offender armed with a firearm.

[Long Duck Dong]

"take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....

I'm hoping you're not the idiot with the knife.

hell no...... lol they are all in canada and the UK according to the stats.... most of the US people that use guns to shoot people are locked up or over seas in wars and helping other countries..... and the NZ people like me... oh we are just watching the rest of the world go to hell in a handbasket while we lead the way with our PC rules, laws and rights that are really screwing up our country......


as a wise man once said, you can take the weapon off a armed man, but you can not take the mouth away from a person with a opinion, ... some people are constantly armed, dangerous and a risk to our safety and wellbeing, and its often not the person with the gun

[tenni]

"roflmao and you think that gun owners are raving lunatics ???? where are the numbers to support what you are saying, tenni and the links to the homicide by year stats for 1970-2011...."

1/ The use of roflmao in this sentence is a term signifying an attitude of ridicule and disdain for the thoughts of others. The numbers are in the text quotes below.


from the article.
“Statistics Canada reported Tuesday that the homicide rate has stayed "relatively stable over the past decade." Prior to that, it had been declining since the mid-1970s.”

"The rate of firearm homicides per 100,000 population has generally been declining since the mid-1970s and, in 2011, reached its lowest point in almost 50 years."
.............................................

from the web page that you refer to http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...nada-2011.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html)


“Canada's national crime rate reached its lowest level since 1972” (2011)"


“The homicide rate has generally been declining since 1975 (3.03 victims per 100,000 people), but rose slightly from 1.62 to 1.73 between 2010 and 2011. This rate was about one-third the United States' rate (4.80), but more than four times the Japanese rate (0.34).”


If there is a 7% increase between 2010 and 2011 that is still far lower than the total number of homicides in 1975. What it indicates is exactly what some are posting. If there is no gun a murderer will turn to another tool (knife) but the number of murders tends to be reduced as knifes are less efficient tools of killing than a gun. In 2012, the stats are not out to be able to tell in 2011 is a blip year but both years are far lower than 1975.

former stats
"The number of murders dropped to 594 in 2007 (598 in 2011), 12 fewer than the previous year 2006 (with 606 homicides). One-third of the 2007 murders were stabbings and another third were by firearm. Handguns were used in two-thirds of all firearm murders" (many illegal handguns smuggled in from the USA and used by gangs)

Reference to 2010 " There were 554 police-reported homicides in 2010, 56 fewer than the year before. The 2010 homicide rate fell to 1.62 per 100,000 population, its lowest level since 1966"

“You can lead a horse to water but you can not make them drink”

[Long Duck Dong]

"roflmao and you think that gun owners are raving lunatics ???? where are the numbers to support what you are saying, tenni and the links to the homicide by year stats for 1970-2011...."

1/ The use of roflmao is a term signifly superiorty and disdain for the thoughts of others. The numbers are in the text quotes below.


from the article.
“Statistics Canada reported Tuesday that the homicide rate has stayed "relatively stable over the past decade." Prior to that, it had been declining since the mid-1970s.”

"The rate of firearm homicides per 100,000 population has generally been declining since the mid-1970s and, in 2011, reached its lowest point in almost 50 years."
.............................................

from the web page that you refer to http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...nada-2011.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html)


“Canada's national crime rate reached its lowest level since 1972” (2011)"


“The homicide rate has generally been declining since 1975 (3.03 victims per 100,000 people), but rose slightly from 1.62 to 1.73 between 2010 and 2011. This rate was about one-third the United States' rate (4.80), but more than four times the Japanese rate (0.34).”


If there is a 7% increase between 2010 and 2011 that is still far lower than the total number of homicides in 1975. What it indicates is exactly what some are posting. If there is no gun a murderer will turn to another tool (knife) but the number of murders tends to be reduced. The year 2011 is a blip increase. In 2012, the stats are not out.

former stats
"The number of murders dropped to 594 in 2007 (598 in 2011), 12 fewer than the previous year (2006). One-third of the 2007 murders were stabbings and another third were by firearm. Handguns were used in two-thirds of all firearm murders" (many illegal handguns smuggled in from the USA and used by gangs)

“You can lead a horse to water but you can not make them drink” (or have analytical skills) comes to mind.


nobody is arguing that the crime rate in canada has dropped and how, except you.....

I posted "roflmao and you think that gun owners are raving lunatics ???? where are the numbers to support what you are saying, tenni and the links to the homicide by year stats for 1970-2011 and I posted it in regards to post 49, where you never posted ANY supporting proof......

I was asking for supportive numbers of what you are saying, as the official stats are saying that they are seeing a INCREASE in the number of knife related homicides and a drop in gun related homicides......

The Canadian murder weapon of choice is now the blade."The rate of firearm homicides per 100,000 population has generally been declining since the mid-1970s and, in 2011, reached its lowest point in almost 50 years."
"An increase in stabbings accounted for virtually the entire increase in homicides in 2011," the federal data agency said.
It said there were 39 more stabbings in 2011 compared to 2010. Overall, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cent


oh gee, look at what I found .....http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2010001/article/11146-eng.htm

table 4 Homicides with knives and firearms, Canada, 1974 to 2008

add that link to the other 2 I have provided for canada,


http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=57


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...nada-2011.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html)

and it all supports what I have been saying the whole time..... the nature of crime is shifting and the type of weapon is shifting..... but people still want to blame guns,......

[bobnangel27]

I own guns. But the 2nd amendment was an unfortunate addition to an otherwise good group of rights. It was written in 1791, or so, for god sakes. Written so people could grab their musket and defend our democracy if it became a tyranny. Its old and very stupid in the world today. Unfortunately there are so many overt deadly guns out there even repealing the 2nd amendment wont do shit. To you right wing zealots, damn. Give it a rest. No one is gonna take your guns. Dont be so paranoid. And guns arent gonna help you against any government who posses cruise missiles. My little 22 and 12 gauge are fine self defense in my home. I dont need handguns either for that matter. Neither do you!!! Face it. Nothing is going to change. This country is in gun hell and will stay there until we are all dead and gone.

[DuckiesDarling]

As a Texas CHL holder I never leave home unarmed. I feel that an armed society is a polite society and when seconds count, the police are minutes away. I'm reminded of the joke where a police officer has pulled over an elderly lady and she gives him her drivers license and her CHL. The policeman asks if she is armed and she states, "Well yes I have a 9mm in the glove box." He asks if she has any other weapons and she says, "Yes, there is a 357 revolver under the seat. He asks if that is all the weapons and she says that there is Glock 40 in the console. Surprised by the number of weapons she has declared he asks, "Mam, what the heck are you afraid of?" and she answers "Not a damned thing!"

Here's a couple of links which pretty well spell out where I stand on this issue:

http://townhall.com/columnists/ashleyherzog/2013/01/04/good-guys-with-guns-n1479114/page/full/

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/important-gun-violence-video-to-share-with-friends/

The second link... Fran and Tenni and any other rabid antigun person.. watch the whole thing. Thanks for posting, Buck.

[gladius]

I own guns. But the 2nd amendment was an unfortunate addition to an otherwise good group of rights. It was written in 1791, or so, for god sakes. Written so people could grab their musket and defend our democracy if it became a tyranny. Its old and very stupid in the world today. Unfortunately there are so many overt deadly guns out there even repealing the 2nd amendment wont do shit. To you right wing zealots, damn. Give it a rest. No one is gonna take your guns. Dont be so paranoid. And guns arent gonna help you against any government who posses cruise missiles. My little 22 and 12 gauge are fine self defense in my home. I dont need handguns either for that matter. Neither do you!!! Face it. Nothing is going to change. This country is in gun hell and will stay there until we are all dead and gone.

That may be the second most idiotic response to anything said on this site. Kind of compares to the guy who wants to wake up to a coffee cup filled with poop.

[gladius]

hell no...... lol they are all in canada and the UK according to the stats.... most of the US people that use guns to shoot people are locked up or over seas in wars and helping other countries..... and the NZ people like me... oh we are just watching the rest of the world go to hell in a handbasket while we lead the way with our PC rules, laws and rights that are really screwing up our country......


as a wise man once said, you can take the weapon off a armed man, but you can not take the mouth away from a person with a opinion, ... some people are constantly armed, dangerous and a risk to our safety and wellbeing, and its often not the person with the gun

LOL, My good man, from the underbelly of the earth. I tried to quote Tenni, but it seemed more appropriate to just grab your sayings. Ugh! Tenni!

[gladius]

"roflmao and you think that gun owners are raving lunatics ???? where are the numbers to support what you are saying, tenni and the links to the homicide by year stats for 1970-2011...."

1/ The use of roflmao in this sentence is a term signifying an attitude of ridicule and disdain for the thoughts of others. The numbers are in the text quotes below.


from the article.
“Statistics Canada reported Tuesday that the homicide rate has stayed "relatively stable over the past decade." Prior to that, it had been declining since the mid-1970s.”

"The rate of firearm homicides per 100,000 population has generally been declining since the mid-1970s and, in 2011, reached its lowest point in almost 50 years."
.............................................

from the web page that you refer to http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...nada-2011.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html)


“Canada's national crime rate reached its lowest level since 1972” (2011)"


“The homicide rate has generally been declining since 1975 (3.03 victims per 100,000 people), but rose slightly from 1.62 to 1.73 between 2010 and 2011. This rate was about one-third the United States' rate (4.80), but more than four times the Japanese rate (0.34).”


If there is a 7% increase between 2010 and 2011 that is still far lower than the total number of homicides in 1975. What it indicates is exactly what some are posting. If there is no gun a murderer will turn to another tool (knife) but the number of murders tends to be reduced as knifes are less efficient tools of killing than a gun. In 2012, the stats are not out to be able to tell in 2011 is a blip year but both years are far lower than 1975.

former stats
"The number of murders dropped to 594 in 2007 (598 in 2011), 12 fewer than the previous year 2006 (with 606 homicides). One-third of the 2007 murders were stabbings and another third were by firearm. Handguns were used in two-thirds of all firearm murders" (many illegal handguns smuggled in from the USA and used by gangs)

Reference to 2010 " There were 554 police-reported homicides in 2010, 56 fewer than the year before. The 2010 homicide rate fell to 1.62 per 100,000 population, its lowest level since 1966"

“You can lead a horse to water but you can not make them drink”

No, you can't. Water boarding works wonders though.

[tenni]

Post 58

“nobody is arguing that the crime rate in canada has dropped and how, except you.....”

I am providing historical facts and yes I am arguing that gun homicides have dropped. That is what this thread is about historical facts about Gun Control...Mr Circular Logic. You are providing BS.

The actual cause for the lowering of gun homicides is not stated in the articles and government reports. What may be a cause for the lowering was the requirement of registering "long guns" in Canada that began in 1993. There was a lot of controversy to the effectiveness of this registry. It was stated that the registry did not lower the gun homicides though. The registry has been destroyed as of 2012 over the protest of police forces and victim right organizations.
.............................

“I was asking for supportive numbers of what you are saying, as the official stats are saying that they are seeing a INCREASE in the number of knife related homicides and a drop in gun related homicides......”

Nope. That is not what the stats are stating at all. The stats indicate that there is an increase from the previous year in knife homicides. Overall for the past 50 years, there is a reduction in the number of gun and knife actual homicides. The poster quoted continues to ignore that point and yet agree it at the same time. wtf

Circular BS in the above quote. I provided the supportive numbers and stats and referenced several years. I gave a comparative explanation.

[gladius]

Post 58

“nobody is arguing that the crime rate in canada has dropped and how, except you.....”

I am providing historical facts and yes I am arguing that gun homicides have dropped. That is what this thread is about historical facts about Gun Control...Mr Circular Logic. You are providing BS.

The actual cause for the lowering of gun homicides is not stated in the articles and government reports. What may be a cause for the lowering was the requirement of registering "long guns" in Canada that began in 1993. There was a lot of controversy to the effectiveness of this registry. It was stated that the registry did not lower the gun homicides though. The registry has been destroyed as of 2012 over the protest of police forces and victim right organizations.
.............................

“I was asking for supportive numbers of what you are saying, as the official stats are saying that they are seeing a INCREASE in the number of knife related homicides and a drop in gun related homicides......”

Nope. That is not what the stats are stating at all. The stats indicate that there is an increase from the previous year in knife homicides. Overall for the past 50 years, there is a reduction in the number of gun and knife actual homicides. The poster quoted continues to ignore that point and yet agree it at the same time. wtf

Circular BS in the above quote. I provided the supportive numbers and stats and referenced several years. I gave a comparative explanation.

Tenni. In no way, shape or form, are you an ignorant man. It is all but impossible to explain, the inate inheritance that the United States Constitutuion put into the hearts and minds of her fellow man. The right to bear arms, is a gate, for an armed citizenry to defend itself against the GOVERNMENT......period. I myself, personally, do not expect you to grasp this concept, you are not an American. God, may He bless Canada.......but you pick fights with Americans.

[void()]

As far as your opinion that a gun is a tool, that is true. Interesting that I don't hear people in my country making this type of connection with hammers, guns, etc. It reads as brainwashing to me and a justification/rationalization by people who want their country to have increasing gun violence rather than merely factual.

Conversely, a culture that does not view guns as tools may be perceived as guilty of brainwashing as well. May appreciate your genuine concerns. Yes, you presented empathetic concerns that were sincere. Your points were valid and well noted. Some even offered gratitude for your superior abasement of our inferior culture, intellects, values, morals and ethics.

Quite well done and you undoubtedly deserve your accolades for the genuine concern and sincerity. In continuing to debate opinion you are vastly demonstrating your professional and personal code of conduct as a human being. This reflects on you with direly poor viewing. The implications which arise suggest that a person must beyond all else appease an insatiable ego which is glutton for praise, is highly insecure, immature.

Apologies for not reading the whole of this thread, nor for being around the site much lately. Think my rationale will be transparent enough. Besides which I have gotten occupied living and trying to enjoy that. I do not need to debate, argue or otherwise converse with separatists bent upon dividing the human race over petty quibbles. Easier to agree to disagree, walk away. If such is your entertainment as are these spurious and trivial diatribes regarding gun control, homophobia, xenophobia, then surely if I could pity myself, I'd pity you too.

N.B.

Yes tenni, I realize that I directed this to you and of you. Apologies for that. Your remark caught my eye, in as much as your superior and profound expertise in mind control was able. There's always three to six sides to all things. It is this you seem to neglect.

In as much as you feel secure with statistics, 90% are made up on the spot. 45% of those are patently wrong, the other 45% are outright falsehoods disguised as axioms. Eventually you find moderation, even in moderation and maybe if lucky stumble over the truth which you shovel under the carpet right away.

That'd be the 1% hiding up some don's arse in an ivory tower in Nottingham University, the truth that is. And well, guess I'm fin ... & will not address you again, tenni.

[gladius]

Conversely, a culture that does not view guns as tools may be perceived as guilty of brainwashing as well. May appreciate your genuine concerns. Yes, you presented empathetic concerns that were sincere. Your points were valid and well noted. Some even offered gratitude for your superior abasement of our inferior culture, intellects, values, morals and ethics.

Quite well done and you undoubtedly deserve your accolades for the genuine concern and sincerity. In continuing to debate opinion you are vastly demonstrating your professional and personal code of conduct as a human being. This reflects on you with direly poor viewing. The implications which arise suggest that a person must beyond all else appease an insatiable ego which is glutton for praise, is highly insecure, immature.

Apologies for not reading the whole of this thread, nor for being around the site much lately. Think my rationale will be transparent enough. Besides which I have gotten occupied living and trying to enjoy that. I do not need to debate, argue or otherwise converse with separatists bent upon dividing the human race over petty quibbles. Easier to agree to disagree, walk away. If such is your entertainment as are these spurious and trivial diatribes regarding gun control, homophobia, xenophobia, then surely if I could pity myself, I'd pity you too.

WOW! Stamping feet on the floor boards saying...........'HOOZAH'! I am stunned at the eloquance, and precision this was delivered. Here! Here!

[tenni]

Void
You have expressed your opinion rather than post a historical fact about gun control. You have aimed your writing as a personal attack at me and then attempt to dance around it being a personal attack. violation of rule two.

Yes, a gun is a tool....a killing tool. As far as accusing posters who are not part of your cult of being brainwashed where is the evidence that having a gun lowers the homicide rate in your society? Where are the stats that mass gun murders have been reduced by having so many guns? I've provided facts about reduction of gun homicides in my country and we have gun control far stricter than your society. Give us the historical fact that your country approach has reduced the homicides over the past thirty years and in particular gun homicides in the US.

Void repeatedly states that he is going to leave the site...to not address person A or person B again. He doesn't though.

[falcondfw]

I own guns. But the 2nd amendment was an unfortunate addition to an otherwise good group of rights. It was written in 1791, or so, for god sakes. Written so people could grab their musket and defend our democracy if it became a tyranny. Its old and very stupid in the world today. Unfortunately there are so many overt deadly guns out there even repealing the 2nd amendment wont do shit. To you right wing zealots, damn. Give it a rest. No one is gonna take your guns. Dont be so paranoid. And guns arent gonna help you against any government who posses cruise missiles. My little 22 and 12 gauge are fine self defense in my home. I dont need handguns either for that matter. Neither do you!!! Face it. Nothing is going to change. This country is in gun hell and will stay there until we are all dead and gone.

I have to respond to this one.

Glad you have guns and can protect yourself.

"Unfortunate Addition"? Seriously? Do you seriously think we would have the rights we do today without a government that fears an armed uprising? Even if ordered to, do you seriously think the military would fire on us? We are not China. We don't train like mind-numbed robots to follow every directive and order of our President and Congress. If the order is bogus, they won't follow it. An order to fire on citizens to put down an armed resistance (not just a bunch of loons - Waco, Idaho, etc.) would never be followed by the military in this country. I know. I was part of it.

"Written so people could grab their musket and defend our democracy if it became a tyranny.". Yes, it was, but that was back when the military was also using muskets. Musket against Musket. Now they use automatic weapons. We can only buy semi-automatic (except in very special cases). Semi-Automatic against fully automatic. Not exactly even like it was before, but a damn site better than a blunderbus or a musket going up against a galil.


To you right wing zealots, damn. Give it a rest. No one is gonna take your guns.

Really. That's what the people who passed the income tax into law said. Back then (1913 - 1915), the rate went from 1% - 7%. Today, we are at 15% - 39.6%. So, you wanna try that argument again?


I dont need handguns either for that matter. Neither do you!!!

Oh? it takes a hell of a lot shorter time to load a magazine into a pistol and it's a lot easier to carry and get it to where you need it, in case of armed intruders. If we outlaw guns, do you really think the criminals will obey? Think about it. THEY ARE CRIMINALS!!! They break the law as a matter of course. I would much rather have a few crazies have access to firearms and be able to defend myself thank you.

[falcondfw]

WOW! Stamping feet on the floor boards saying...........'HOOZAH'! I am stunned at the eloquance, and precision this was delivered. Here! Here!

Void is often very eloquent, whether you agree with him or disagree with him on things. Most around here respect that about him, as well as his intellect.

[Long Duck Dong]

Post 58

“nobody is arguing that the crime rate in canada has dropped and how, except you.....”

I am providing historical facts and yes I am arguing that gun homicides have dropped. That is what this thread is about historical facts about Gun Control...Mr Circular Logic. You are providing BS.

The actual cause for the lowering of gun homicides is not stated in the articles and government reports. What may be a cause for the lowering was the requirement of registering "long guns" in Canada that began in 1993. There was a lot of controversy to the effectiveness of this registry. It was stated that the registry did not lower the gun homicides though. The registry has been destroyed as of 2012 over the protest of police forces and victim right organizations.
.............................

“I was asking for supportive numbers of what you are saying, as the official stats are saying that they are seeing a INCREASE in the number of knife related homicides and a drop in gun related homicides......”

Nope. That is not what the stats are stating at all. The stats indicate that there is an increase from the previous year in knife homicides. Overall for the past 50 years, there is a reduction in the number of gun and knife actual homicides. The poster quoted continues to ignore that point and yet agree it at the same time. wtf

Circular BS in the above quote. I provided the supportive numbers and stats and referenced several years. I gave a comparative explanation.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html

the officials say
"An increase in stabbings accounted for virtually the entire increase in homicides in 2011," the federal data agency said.
It said there were 39 more stabbings in 2011 compared to 2010. Overall, stabbings accounted for 35 per cent of homicides, firearms for 27 per cent, beatings for 22 per cent and strangulation for seven per cent.

you say
Nope. That is not what the stats are stating at all. The stats indicate that there is an increase from the previous year in knife homicides. Overall for the past 50 years, there is a reduction in the number of gun and knife actual homicides. The poster quoted continues to ignore that point and yet agree it at the same time. wtf

when you make up your mind what you are actually trying to say.... then tell the men in white coats, and they may let you out of your padded cell....... cos the only person arguing with you, is you........




...

[darkeyes]

The second link... Fran and Tenni and any other rabid antigun person.. watch the whole thing. Thanks for posting, Buck.
It is not on our side the rabies exists.. we endeavour to stay away from foaming mouths and wild eyes.. and while I agree generally with the views expressed on poverty, jobs and education, that isn't the whole story...

[void()]

Void
You have expressed your opinion rather than post a historical fact about gun control. You have aimed your writing as a personal attack at me and then attempt to dance around it being a personal attack. violation of rule two.

Yes, a gun is a tool....a killing tool. As far as accusing posters who are not part of your cult of being brainwashed where is the evidence that having a gun lowers the homicide rate in your society? Where are the stats that mass gun murders have been reduced by having so many guns? I've provided facts about reduction of gun homicides in my country and we have gun control far stricter than your society. Give us the historical fact that your country approach has reduced the homicides over the past thirty years and in particular gun homicides in the US.

Void repeatedly states that he is going to leave the site...to not address person A or person B again. He doesn't though.

I will apologize for responding to you, this post of yours seems to merit such response. One could say you are attempting to call me out with the post. That's fine and I can appreciate that. Unfortunately, ... well, I'm responding.

First, yes I did state an opinion. Here let me clarify the discussion a bit. This grants one various definitions of the word opinion (http://onelook.com/?w=opinion&ls=a). I prefer the first out of American Heritage dictionary which sums up the rest nice. An opinion is "a belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof". Ask a Christian to verify the existence of God. They believe regardless. Opinions are subjective and do not need proof or evidence by their very definition.

Second, my voicing of an opinion is granted me in my country via rights established by some whom owed to using guns in an effort to liberate us to -- believe as we choose freely. I am quite within the legal rights in my country to believe guns can be useful tools. I do not need to offer you any rationale, evidence, proofs for such a belief. It is a subjective opinion in case you missed it.

My response to you was in fact not a personal attack. I did not call you names, did not label you, objectify you or insult your personage, reputation. I did state that the way you proceed here may reflect poorly upon you. The same may be said of anyone on the site, or any site. If you can not see that is not a personal attack but a statement of common fact, perhaps you need to re-access your abilities to perceive the written word accurately.

I have re-accessed my conclusion or estimation of you as a person, which is also a means of saying I've adjusted my opinion of you. This new opinion I have of you is directly related upon your actions and continuance of this rubbish discussion. Simply put as I've said before, if you do not desire me calling you stupid, do not act stupid. That is not a personal attack.

Third and possibly lastly, as far as I am aware I do not belong to any cult, clique, club, religion or vast demographic of ideology. I am the sort whom takes what I need from wherever it lies, moves along and creates my own amalgamation. I follow gestalt which is the principle I've described above in taking bits from wholes to form another whole. That also means I'm found of pretending to be tenni, falcon, fran, ldd, drew, my wife, my boyfriend, the guy in the street who is a total stranger. I do this serving the purpose of being able to see various points of view, opinions, ideas, thoughts.

I find this to be helpful in responding to life in general, much more so for conversing. That by no means excuses me nor declares I'm perfect. It is what it is. You continued the conversation by way of attempting to call me out.

I'm glad you made the effort as it allowed me opportunity to further clarify myself, to myself if not to you or others as well. I will not address you in any fashion should you so desire. What is good for the goose holds inversely so for the gander. Vis a vi, do not address me or make feeble attempts to call me out. I will respond accordingly in my discretion as is my reserved right as a human being.

[Gearbox]

The second link... Fran and Tenni and any other rabid antigun person.. watch the whole thing. Thanks for posting, Buck.
'Violent crime' can be anything from threatening violence, car theft, pub brawls, burgulary and vandalism to murder. It is not homicide!
The most reported 'violent crime' in England & Wales is vandelism. Kids being twats.:rolleyes:
As we are in a 'Big Brother' culture, we tend to be 999 happy, and get the police to do their jobs. What we don't do is carry firearms to do their jobs for them out of a no confidence view of law enforcement.
This, the 'reasearcher' in the vid completely forgot to 'research' in his vid. BUT he does have an exellent sollution to the trouble spots there:- get the police and politicians to do their jobs!
He hit on another thing too, that things are not as bad in America as your led to believe. Paranoia and insecurity is blatantly encouraged by media AND by pro-gun enthusiasts. No place is 'safe' with that going on in anybodies heads.

[goldenfinger]

I started a joke,and the whole world started laughing,, you know the song

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/perry-prayer-effective-gun-control-article-1.1241788

[tenni]

'Violent crime' can be anything from threatening violence, car theft, pub brawls, burgulary and vandalism to murder. It is not homicide!
The most reported 'violent crime' in England & Wales is vandelism. Kids being twats.:rolleyes:
As we are in a 'Big Brother' culture, we tend to be 999 happy, and get the police to do their jobs. What we don't do is carry firearms to do their jobs for them out of a no confidence view of law enforcement.
This, the 'reasearcher' in the vid completely forgot to 'research' in his vid. BUT he does have an exellent sollution to the trouble spots there:- get the police and politicians to do their jobs!
He hit on another thing too, that things are not as bad in America as your led to believe. Paranoia and insecurity is blatantly encouraged by media AND by pro-gun enthusiasts. No place is 'safe' with that going on in anybodies heads.

I agree Gear in particular to what seems to be a huge fear factor if not paranoia on the issue of gun control.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/impo...-with-friends/


The man speaking in the video is interesting and presents his opinion well.
The point is that the question is not about all violent crime but gun homicides and gun controls role in increasing /reducing gun homicides. He admits that England & Wales has a lower homicide rate. There you are!!!! That is the one stat category that this thread is about and the US people struggle with ..mass homicides etc. The fact that US violent crime has dropped but the gun homicides are still so much higher than the rest of the G8 is a factor that needs connecting. What are the causes of that?


“AR15 is a subset of the rifle and only 3% of gun homicides caused by rifles”. What about the subset itself in relationship to say mass murders in public spaces?(theatres, schools, shopping malls etc.) What percentage of rifle homicides involve this weapon or similar weapons in mass homicides? He accuses others of having an agenda? Does he not have one?


His bottom line about figuring out factors that cause overall violent crimes such as jobs, poverty is very true imo. The income disparity may be a true fact as far as violent crimes but not all crimes. Why do some living in poverty not turn to gun crimes and others do? Worth exploring in another thread but the topic is historical facts about gun control. If other societies have gun control with a more intense checking before purchasing and on going checks method and their gun homicides are much lower, then deal with that. Deal with an antiquated constitution and its role in gun homicide issues. Deal with the fact of the role of lobbying on this issue.

[babloobla]

It's amazing this thread is getting so many replies. There is more to life than sexual identity but this argument ought to be on the NRA site, or something. Regarding the opening thread corellating gun control with eventual attempts at mass murder by the government, it's a bit of extreme fear mongering. All those events were preceded by social and political revolutions that precipitated the mass killings. Still legally licensed American motoroists kill more Americans than American gunowners. Noone stopped flying after nine eleven, Cain killed Abel with a garden tool and the jaw bone of an ass did it's fair share of damage. Pol Pot had his victims kill each other with clubs, cause it was cheaper. What is wrong with people?

[falcondfw]

then deal with that. Deal with an antiquated constitution

Tenni, I am sick and tired of your America bashing. You will never understand our Constitution and the concept of freedom because you live in the People's Republic of Canada and are happy to do so and agree with all the rules and regulations up there. That is your choice. Fine and dandy. But stop bashing something you don't understand and never will. It makes you look like the ass you are.

[tenni]

Falcon
Your constitution is a historical fact that US people are dealing with right now. They seem to be struggling. Don't think that Canada is an idealistic and best solution when it comes to gun control. We have just gone through a struggle with gun control and changed a law. I don't agree with the change personally but it was changed with regards to long gun registry. One province , Quebec, is considering their own long gun registry even though the feds have scrapped it. The historical fact that gun homicides decreased when the long gun registry was enforced and the fact that the police were opposed to scrapping it are historical facts. The facts of the impact are yet to be found out.


I remind you that you are posting on a site from Canada and owned by a Canadian. I could be all polite like some in my country when speaking to US people on a Canadian web site. I'm telling you what your country looks like to those not caught up in your antiquated constitutional facts to some who hold a similar perspective as mine. The point that you are holding it at its status quo has given you gun ownership abuse and many gun homicides. I understand your constitution. It is not that hard to comprehend. What do we outside your country not understand about your constitution milita wording?

[gen11]

Tenni, tell me how the nation of ownership of this site affects gun control issues in the United States, please? And would you car to suggest that its owner do withour revenues derived from it's (apparently) majority American participants?

falconfw's point is well taken: you simply don't know what the eff you're talking about relative to the United States or its citizens. South of the border, you are irrelevant.

[gladius]

I remind you that you are posting on a site from Canada and owned by a Canadian. I could be all polite like some in my country when speaking to US people on a Canadian web site. I'm telling you what your country looks like to those not caught up in your antiquated constitutional facts to some who hold a similar perspective as mine. The point that you are holding it at its status quo has given you gun ownership abuse and many gun homicides. I understand your constitution. It is not that hard to comprehend. What do we outside your country not understand about your constitution milita wording?

Maybe you are an ignorant asshole, Tenni. Let me remind you, and the sites owner, that 95% of the users here are AMERICAN! And frankly, who the fuck are you to call our Constitution antiquated?

[falcondfw]

Gladius and Gen,
Tenni is a troll, as has been shown on numerous occassions. His America bashing is well known and, frankly, disgusting.

People don't bash Canada. They don't bash England. They Don't bash Scotland. The only country that seems to be acceptable to bash on this and many other sites is America. Frankly, I think it is jealousy. We are not perfect and do make mistakes, but to listen to some, you would think we were imperial Japan and Hitler's Germany rolled into one.

Tenni likes to start threads and post in threads to get a reaction and to tear down others (especially Americans). Look at the threads he has started or posted in and for the majority of them, you'll see that I am right.

He is an intelligent guy, but his obvious bias makes a lot of people put him on ignore. I had him on ignore at one time, but once in a while he does contribute without bashing and in an intelligent manner.

[falcondfw]

Your constitution is a historical fact that US people are dealing with right now. They seem to be struggling. Don't think that Canada is an idealistic and best solution when it comes to gun control. We have just gone through a struggle with gun control and changed a law. I don't agree with the change personally but it was changed with regards to long gun registry. One province , Quebec, is considering their own long gun registry even though the feds have scrapped it. The historical fact that gun homicides decreased when the long gun registry was enforced and the fact that the police were opposed to scrapping it are historical facts. The facts of the impact are yet to be found out.


Frankly, Tenni, considering your bias against America, I could give a rat's pitoot what we look like to you or people who think like you. And I could care less about your gun control fight in Canada. Canada is not America.

[Gearbox]

Maybe you are an ignorant asshole, Tenni. Let me remind you, and the sites owner, that 95% of the users here are AMERICAN! And frankly, who the fuck are you to call our Constitution antiquated?
No Gladious! Falkcons attempt at muting Tenni's opinions on the American constitution was as far as any cyberbullying xzenphobic shite is going to go, which is nowhere. Your attempt is just as purile.

While we're on that subject:- Falcon sweet thing, if you don't like bad things said about your country by Americans and non-Americans alike, try NOT posting how your government is going to commit genicide, you have to prepare for armed home invasion and how you can not live without a firearm even though your not in a warzone.
That might help.;)

[goldenfinger]

Maybe you are an ignorant asshole, Tenni. Let me remind you, and the sites owner, that 95% of the users here are AMERICAN! And frankly, who the fuck are you to call our Constitution antiquated?[/QUOTE]

Try the rest of the western world.

[falcondfw]

No Gladious! Falkcons attempt at muting Tenni's opinions on the American constitution was as far as any cyberbullying xzenphobic shite is going to go, which is nowhere. Your attempt is just as purile.

While we're on that subject:- Falcon sweet thing, if you don't like bad things said about your country by Americans and non-Americans alike, try NOT posting how your government is going to commit genicide, you have to prepare for armed home invasion and how you can not live without a firearm even though your not in a warzone.
That might help.;)

Gear,
We have disagreed on things before and I have no problems with people who disagree with the way of life here in America. If you don't like it, that's fine and it is your right to have an opinion, as it is Tenni's. Where I draw the line is constant beating over the head with how much someone dislikes what happens in America.

Fine, Tenni doesn't like America, everyone on this site knows that. So why does he have to keep harping on it?

Say it. Get it over with. And move on to some constructive thoughts in other threads about different subjects.

But almost every time Tenni posts, it is to backhandedly rip America a new one and I am sick of it.

I don't bash Canada, because, frankly, I like Canada. Been there several times. Have several good friends in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver (including a cousin). While I may disagree with some of the laws there (as they are reported by Tenni), I don't tear them down, because I don't feel it is my place. I don't live under those laws.

I would expect common courtesy would cause Tenni and others who don't live under the laws of the USA to respect America and her laws the same way.

That is why I like debating with you and Fran. You state your opinion, respectfully, and move on to another subject. You both are not constantly trying to tear down others and you both treat others with respect, 99% of the time (we all have bad days. I have had mine.)

If Tenni is this way in real life, I would expect he has very few, if any friends, and that he spends a lot of time in the local hospital - as a patient.

And what do you mean about my government committing genocide? That is precisely why we have the second Amendment to the Constitution. To prevent that from happening. Like it did in China or Germany or Russia when a government ran amok, because they could, because the citizenry was unarmed.

And I do live without a firearm. For 2 main reasons. 1. I can't afford a handgun right now. 2. I have 3 kids who are very curious about everything. I know how to secure a firearm, but don't want to take a chance.

[gladius]

No Gladious! Falkcons attempt at muting Tenni's opinions on the American constitution was as far as any cyberbullying xzenphobic shite is going to go, which is nowhere. Your attempt is just as purile.

While we're on that subject:- Falcon sweet thing, if you don't like bad things said about your country by Americans and non-Americans alike, try NOT posting how your government is going to commit genicide, you have to prepare for armed home invasion and how you can not live without a firearm even though your not in a warzone.
That might help.;)

Come now, Gear, you're usually a man of quiet opinion. I have a question for you though: you and Fran use this word; Xenophobic, like it is a common word used by you. An educated man, or woman, knows what the word means. What I am finding, is that is the users of the word, quite like the liberals here who use the term 'racist' are actually the ones that the words apply to.

[gladius]

Gear,
We have disagreed on things before and I have no problems with people who disagree with the way of life here in America. If you don't like it, that's fine and it is your right to have an opinion, as it is Tenni's. Where I draw the line is constant beating over the head with how much someone dislikes what happens in America.

Fine, Tenni doesn't like America, everyone on this site knows that. So why does he have to keep harping on it?

Say it. Get it over with. And move on to some constructive thoughts in other threads about different subjects.

But almost every time Tenni posts, it is to backhandedly rip America a new one and I am sick of it.

I don't bash Canada, because, frankly, I like Canada. Been there several times. Have several good friends in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver (including a cousin). While I may disagree with some of the laws there (as they are reported by Tenni), I don't tear them down, because I don't feel it is my place. I don't live under those laws.

I would expect common courtesy would cause Tenni and others who don't live under the laws of the USA to respect America and her laws the same way.

That is why I like debating with you and Fran. You state your opinion, respectfully, and move on to another subject. You both are not constantly trying to tear down others and you both treat others with respect, 99% of the time (we all have bad days. I have had mine.)

If Tenni is this way in real life, I would expect he has very few, if any friends, and that he spends a lot of time in the local hospital - as a patient.

And what do you mean about my government committing genocide? That is precisely why we have the second Amendment to the Constitution. To prevent that from happening. Like it did in China or Germany or Russia when a government ran amok, because they could, because the citizenry was unarmed.

And I do live without a firearm. For 2 main reasons. 1. I can't afford a handgun right now. 2. I have 3 kids who are very curious about everything. I know how to secure a firearm, but don't want to take a chance.

Not all of that is true, Falcon. Fran is 100 percent xenophoic. It's why she uses the word like she just found out what it means.

[gladius]

Gladius and Gen,
Tenni is a troll, as has been shown on numerous occassions. His America bashing is well known and, frankly, disgusting.

People don't bash Canada. They don't bash England. They Don't bash Scotland. The only country that seems to be acceptable to bash on this and many other sites is America. Frankly, I think it is jealousy. We are not perfect and do make mistakes, but to listen to some, you would think we were imperial Japan and Hitler's Germany rolled into one.

Tenni likes to start threads and post in threads to get a reaction and to tear down others (especially Americans). Look at the threads he has started or posted in and for the majority of them, you'll see that I am right.

He is an intelligent guy, but his obvious bias makes a lot of people put him on ignore. I had him on ignore at one time, but once in a while he does contribute without bashing and in an intelligent manner.

Well said. I agree fully.

[gladius]

I'm taking Tenni's rant that the site is hosted in Canada, and owned by a Canadian as some kind of veiled threat of being banned. Tell ya what; maybe us Americans should boycott the site and pull it off the web. How's that for a threat?

[darkeyes]

Little over-reaction isn't it? Nothing like taking a sledgehammer 2 crack a nut is there? tenni made no threat, veiled or otherwise.. merely made a statement of fact.. but then why not make gud drama out of things.. helps keep the interest. I doubt Drew would ban Americans just for being Americans so ur perfectly safe.. boycott if u will, but boycott when u have something to boycott about... not just cos u have a gripe about words a man uses in a post.. this site is about freedom of speech as much as it is about bisexuality and queer issues.. no matter how much we like or dislike what people say we should never forget that..

Many think tenni dislikes the US and Americans.. I don't believe either is the case.. he observes and comments about what he observes, admittedly from afar.. he has adversely criticised his own country too in the past.. many Americans have done this also and they too have done this from afar.. the US as a state comments on and attempts to change the ways of other nations.. and many Americans comment likewise and so..

.. no one should be surprised when other peoples from other nations do the same thing to the US.. remarkably little is done out of animosity at least on this site, however much some would make out otherwise. I for one have no objection to anyone criticising my country at all, God knows it has much that needs changing and deserves criticism.. or any aspect of it, or any aspect of me as a person for that matter.. I will fight my corner when needed, but accepting that my country and myself are both very imperfect things good luck to any who wishes to have a go at either.. I will agree or disagree and for the most part I hope in good grace, but like anyone am subject to fits of pique for whatever reason and can sometimes b a tadge tetchy.....if I believe in freedom of speech which I do with a passion, I respect the rights of all to make whatever comment they wish but would prefer it to be fair.. but as with tenni and anyone else, what is fair is a very subjective thing to judge.. and each of us will judge it differently...

[Long Duck Dong]

there is a big difference between disagreeing with another countries policies and / or the way the country is run or what some people think..... but to constantly imply that people are mentally incapable of making informed decisions and choices.... is a lil rude, considering that tenni has posted in the past in the site about his own experiences with his own brain damage......

what really stands out, fran, i think back to the issue over you calling males, lesser mortals, in the site and the way you reacted to people that had a issue with it, you told them to basically get over it, it was a joke and you could not see a issue with calling males, lesser mortals.....

most people do not use tenni's own issues with brain damage against him or your gender against you, fran..... but its very telling that both of you have no issues with showing how true you are to your * everybody is equal and deserves to be treated with respect * stances, when it comes to using other peoples mental states or gender against them ....

[falcondfw]

Not all of that is true, Falcon. Fran is 100 percent xenophoic. It's why she uses the word like she just found out what it means.

Well, I don't think Fran is. We have had many conversations and although I disagree with many of her positions, she is intelligent, articulate, and friendly (mostly. lol.).
Also, I believe her last vacation was in the Seattle area last fall. Not exactly something a xenophobe would do.

[falcondfw]

I'm taking Tenni's rant that the site is hosted in Canada, and owned by a Canadian as some kind of veiled threat of being banned. Tell ya what; maybe us Americans should boycott the site and pull it off the web. How's that for a threat?

You don't need to fear that unless you break the rules. The site IS hosted in Canada and owned by a Canadian.
But Drew is one of the most patient guys I have ever talked to. He is very reasonable and thoughtful and EXTREMELY tolerant.
Tenni can spout off all he wants, but this site belongs to Drew and no one else. Fear not.

[falcondfw]

the US as a state comments on and attempts to change the ways of other nations..

Yes, the government does. When it is warranted, we should. Like in Afghanistan vs. The Taliban, when they supported a mass murderer and tried to hide him. In other cases, like using loans to influence governments of 3rd world countries and tie their hands unjustly, we should keep our noses out.


Many think tenni dislikes the US and Americans.. I don't believe either is the case..

Fran, from about 95% of the things he has posted, I have to seriously disagree with you. Besides being a disagreeable sort of fellow and a bully who is doing everything he can to change America into Canada South, he hates Americans and has made no bones about it. Everyone and their brother knows how he feels. And since they do, I wish he would give it a rest. People can make their points without consistently bashing one country or one person.


.. no one should be surprised when other peoples from other nations do the same thing to the US.. remarkably little is done out of animosity at least on this site, however much some would make out otherwise. I for one have no objection to anyone criticising my country at all, God knows it has much that needs changing and deserves criticism.. or any aspect of it, or any aspect of me as a person for that matter..

Fran, no country or person is perfect. You recognize this. So do I. Trying to change this is a good thing . . . when it is your country. Criticizing is one thing. Harping is quite another. Tenni harps and bashes. For the most part, you and I and gear and many others do not.


I will agree or disagree and for the most part I hope in good grace, but like anyone am subject to fits of pique for whatever reason and can sometimes b a tadge tetchy.....

And you do disagree with grace and class for the most part. We all have bad days. I have had mine. But it gets REALLY, REALLY FREAKIN tiresome when it is the same old thing over and over again. You do not do that. He does.

[spring59]

Okay, so let's follow your example of the car. Lots of people die in road accidents but no one is arguing that the government should ban the ownership and use of cars. But there are strict laws and controls in place to make the roads safer and limit the number of fatalities- you have to pass a test and prove you are fit to drive before you are granted a license, and there are laws around speeding, dangerous driving, DWI and the design of vehicles which are strictly enforced. So why are the pro gun advocates so up in arms about tighter laws controlling the use of guns? The vast majority of those in favor of stricter gun control are not suggesting that guns be banned- no one is arguing against every american's right to own a hand gun to protect him or herself. What is proposed is the banning of automatic rifles that can fire 100 bullets a minute and cause untold death and destruction, and the tougher enforcement of background checks. The statistics in this thread are interesting but as with all stats, you can twist them any way you like to make your point. The undeniable fact is that no civilized nation on this planet, other than the US, tolerates or legally allows the civilian ownership of these military style weapons of mass destruction. No responsible person can rationalize why they would need to own weapons of that sort to protect themselves.

[falcondfw]

Okay, so let's follow your example of the car. Lots of people die in road accidents but no one is arguing that the government should ban the ownership and use of cars. But there are strict laws and controls in place to make the roads safer and limit the number of fatalities- you have to pass a test and prove you are fit to drive before you are granted a license, and there are laws around speeding, dangerous driving, DWI and the design of vehicles which are strictly enforced. So why are the pro gun advocates so up in arms about tighter laws controlling the use of guns? The vast majority of those in favor of stricter gun control are not suggesting that guns be banned- no one is arguing against every american's right to own a hand gun to protect him or herself. What is proposed is the banning of automatic rifles that can fire 100 bullets a minute and cause untold death and destruction, and the tougher enforcement of background checks. The statistics in this thread are interesting but as with all stats, you can twist them any way you like to make your point. The undeniable fact is that no civilized nation on this planet, other than the US, tolerates or legally allows the civilian ownership of these military style weapons of mass destruction. No responsible person can rationalize why they would need to own weapons of that sort to protect themselves.

And this is where you are wrong. What is proposed is a ban on the SEMI-automatic AR-15 and other weapons, as well as a limit of 10 bullets per clip. Did anyone ever think they might buy 3 or 4 clips?

[Gearbox]

@Falcon- In fairness to you, this is where the first crack at 'valid by nationality' came in:-

btw the argument that you are trying to use as proof of gun control etc... is the same thing that the pro gun ownerships have been saying the whole time..... take away the guns and people will use something else........... so the ball is in the canadians court now..... knife related homicides are on the increase in canada..... best you all spend a lil more time in ya own back yards, worrying about something in ya own country..... cos ya US neighbours have a simple answer to a idiot with a knife.....
This, you gave an 'Amen' to, for it's 'mind your own buisness' attitude I expect. But LDD isn't American himself, and if he wasn't pro-gun he'd most likely get the same treatment as Tenni for the amount of posting he does on the thread. Many of those postings are providing an agteement with Tenni, yet claims to be proof that he's wrong. So Tenni responds to clarify, as he so loves to do. It's annoying for ALL including Tenni I'm sure.

As for courtesy and respect for other countries laws etc, that's just another way of saying "Mind your own buisness!". That doesn't work on an international site! You could start a thread and state that it's just for Americans though. That would be fine, and interesting IMO.
But when somebody is slated for their opinions on an open thread and their country of origin is used to silence those opinions, it comes accros as xzenophobic. That maybe just a tint in an overdefensive attack on unwanted opinion? But is uncalled for never the less. Tenni doesn't have a grudge against America, and his opinions are not held by just non-Americans either. Your not under attack!

As for genocide by your government, doesn't that qualify as anti-American? Compare what you say about your government and safety in your society to a wife who feels her life is at risk by her husband. You'd either tell her to get out of the mentaly hostile home or ask if she has reason to fear him. Some might claim that's not respectfull of the sanctity of marrige. Would you care?
These things are being said by you, and like a typical abused wife/husband you protest if any find fault with the abuser. BUT you haven't actualy been abused, and that's what makes you seem to be so pointlessly ill speaking of your own country. It's bloody confusing!:tongue:

Of course the 2nd amendmant is antiquated as far as an 'uprising' is concerned. Your not in some 3rd world country where the government would come a shooting if they wanted to cull the populace. There are sadly far better economic ways to do that. You'd cough, get sweat on, you'd die, etc.:eek2:
The government would step in to 'help' with the crisis, and the survivors would be lambs. They are not dumb!

I'm kinda glad you don't own a firearm, and that you consider it a potential risk to your curious children. You didn't need one today, and most likely won't ever. That's something good to say about your country. Why don't we hear tales of safety instead of those foreboding ones?
(Forget the biological culling scenario before contemplating that!lol)

[Long Duck Dong]

gearbox... and yes, I am sticking my nose in cos my name was mentioned...... how many people post their opinions of other countries, cultures, beliefs, and resort to implied opinions that people that have a certain belief or understanding, are mentally impaired, delusional, brainwashed or in some way, inferior to other people by way of sexuality or gender.... cos most people can immediately name one person.....

I am not american, yet you and tenni implied the NZ police force were idiots cos I have a firearms license... the NZ firearms law is what the US is looking at adopting....so if its good enuf for america to look seriously at our laws and not those of canada or the UK, then we must have the types of laws that work best in the US's eyes.... that makes me proud of my countries laws and more supportive of them..... and question why the UK and canada are not making the same impression with the US

I can only assume that the US mentally impaired gun owners and people that want more gun control laws are seeing that the mentally impaired nz police force are using laws that allow mentally impaired people to possess firearms in accordance with NZ law.... and that would mean that the brainwashed american people that believe in the right to bear arms but also the right to be safe in their own country, must have the same level of lower level IQ as other gun owners around the world that would like to see the mentally impaired and brainwashed in the US agree that the new laws may work if they can get them thru...

there is no way in hell that intelligent people would want more gun control laws, americans and other gun owners live in fear and are too mentally impaired and brainwashed, to want something that is of benefit to so many....... tenni is most vocal about how people are incapable of such thinking, specially in america..... and that is why canada is such a peaceful and safe place, yet I would have more chance of being shot and killed in canada than I would in NZ.....

[gladius]

You don't need to fear that unless you break the rules. The site IS hosted in Canada and owned by a Canadian.
But Drew is one of the most patient guys I have ever talked to. He is very reasonable and thoughtful and EXTREMELY tolerant.
Tenni can spout off all he wants, but this site belongs to Drew and no one else. Fear not.

I respect your opinion, Falcon, but the owners own actions contradict your statement.

[gladius]

Well, I don't think Fran is. We have had many conversations and although I disagree with many of her positions, she is intelligent, articulate, and friendly (mostly. lol.).
Also, I believe her last vacation was in the Seattle area last fall. Not exactly something a xenophobe would do.

and I've been to Russia. I am not sure what that has to do with anything.

[gladius]

Little over-reaction isn't it? Nothing like taking a sledgehammer 2 crack a nut is there? tenni made no threat, veiled or otherwise.. merely made a statement of fact.. but then why not make gud drama out of things.. helps keep the interest. I doubt Drew would ban Americans just for being Americans so ur perfectly safe.. boycott if u will, but boycott when u have something to boycott about... not just cos u have a gripe about words a man uses in a post.. this site is about freedom of speech as much as it is about bisexuality and queer issues.. no matter how much we like or dislike what people say we should never forget that..

Many think tenni dislikes the US and Americans.. I don't believe either is the case.. he observes and comments about what he observes, admittedly from afar.. he has adversely criticised his own country too in the past.. many Americans have done this also and they too have done this from afar.. the US as a state comments on and attempts to change the ways of other nations.. and many Americans comment likewise and so..

.. no one should be surprised when other peoples from other nations do the same thing to the US.. remarkably little is done out of animosity at least on this site, however much some would make out otherwise. I for one have no objection to anyone criticising my country at all, God knows it has much that needs changing and deserves criticism.. or any aspect of it, or any aspect of me as a person for that matter.. I will fight my corner when needed, but accepting that my country and myself are both very imperfect things good luck to any who wishes to have a go at either.. I will agree or disagree and for the most part I hope in good grace, but like anyone am subject to fits of pique for whatever reason and can sometimes b a tadge tetchy.....if I believe in freedom of speech which I do with a passion, I respect the rights of all to make whatever comment they wish but would prefer it to be fair.. but as with tenni and anyone else, what is fair is a very subjective thing to judge.. and each of us will judge it differently...

you sound like Christine Amanpour. Even CNN dropped her dribble years ago.

[darkeyes]

you sound like Christine Amanpour. Even CNN dropped her dribble years ago.
Why ty, Gladys.. compliments abound 2 day... and they didn't drop Christiane at all.. she left.. and she is back... just in case u didn't know...:impleased

[darkeyes]

there is a big difference between disagreeing with another countries policies and / or the way the country is run or what some people think..... but to constantly imply that people are mentally incapable of making informed decisions and choices.... is a lil rude, considering that tenni has posted in the past in the site about his own experiences with his own brain damage......

what really stands out, fran, i think back to the issue over you calling males, lesser mortals, in the site and the way you reacted to people that had a issue with it, you told them to basically get over it, it was a joke and you could not see a issue with calling males, lesser mortals.....

most people do not use tenni's own issues with brain damage against him or your gender against you, fran..... but its very telling that both of you have no issues with showing how true you are to your * everybody is equal and deserves to be treated with respect * stances, when it comes to using other peoples mental states or gender against them ....
I have never used anyone's mental state against them.. certainly not yours.. I have suffered bouts of deep clinical depression now and know how hurtful many can be about people with mental problems.. that is an unfair and erroneous claim... neither do I use gender against anyone simply because their gender is not the same as mine even although I am all too aware that there are those who think so. I have before now defended u against tenni. and let me say more than u know when I have considered him to be unfair.. and should need arise I will do so again publicly or privately as I would do for anyone who was in my view unfairly criticised for any aspect of his or herself.. just as I shall defend him or her against what I perceive as unjustified attacks against him/her or anyone else, by you, or any other person...

..any comment I may make about a person's words is a comment upon the view those words convey.. not upon his or her mental state, origin, gender, mental state or any other part of that person's being.. it is upon what is expressed nothing more... and like tenni, just like you, my comments are based on belief, and my own observations of what I see of the world and what I have learned or think I have learned, however flawed and sketchy any or all of that may be.

[darkeyes]

Not all of that is true, Falcon. Fran is 100 percent xenophoic. It's why she uses the word like she just found out what it means.
Ya kno, Babes, ya can question the views of people, and the views and actions of governments and nations other than ur own, and ya can criticise without actually not liking them and certainly without h8ing them... it is possible to argue, discuss and debate the gr8 issues of the world without being xenophobic and not liking peeps much because of their place of origin...:bigrin: Just like ya can agree with someone 100% who lives next door to ya and who ya can't stand the sight of...;)

[Long Duck Dong]

I have never used anyone's mental state against them.. certainly not yours.. I have suffered bouts of deep clinical depression now and know how hurtful many can be about people with mental problems.. that is an unfair and erroneous claim... neither do I use gender against anyone simply because their gender is not the same as mine even although I am all too aware that there are those who think so. I have before now defended u against tenni. and let me say more than u know when I have considered him to be unfair.. and should need arise I will do so again publicly or privately as I would do for anyone who was in my view unfairly criticised for any aspect of his or herself.. just as I shall defend him or her against what I perceive as unjustified attacks against him/her or anyone else, by you, or any other person...

..any comment I may make about a person's words is a comment upon the view those words convey.. not upon his or her mental state, origin, gender, mental state or any other part of that person's being.. it is upon what is expressed nothing more... and like tenni, just like you, my comments are based on belief, and my own observations of what I see of the world and what I have learned or think I have learned, however flawed and sketchy any or all of that may be.


sighs..... fran, I never said you did use anyones mental state against them...... in fact I believe that I was very clear about who said what in post 92

what really stands out, fran, i think back to the issue over you calling males, lesser mortals, in the site and the way you reacted to people that had a issue with it, you told them to basically get over it, it was a joke and you could not see a issue with calling males, lesser mortals.....

most people do not use tenni's own issues with brain damage against him or your gender against you, fran..... but its very telling that both of you have no issues with showing how true you are to your * everybody is equal and deserves to be treated with respect * stances, when it comes to using other peoples mental states or gender against them ....


so save the long winded hyperbole for somebody that gives a shit about your viewpoints.... you have jammed them down our throats for a few good years now, even to the point of telling people their life experiences are utter bollox because you think or your friends did........ and on the occasions when you have been asked to apologise when you have clearly been mistaken about something, you have refused to.......

so fran, in the immortal words of you, what utter tosh you posted.... complete self obsessed bollox....... cos I have watched you post about how you have seen nothing wrong with his posts for quite some time, 2 weeks after you called him out on some very offensive remarks directed at some members, and if I recall, it was around the time he was temp banned for some remarks......

now, I do not want a apology cos you once again, failed to read what I wrote, correctly and will no doubt try and blame me for your failure, as you have done repeatedly in the past to me and others....... it would be a far better thing if you learnt to walk amongst the mortals on earth cos maybe you would realise that we may be human.... but thats what makes us so tolerant and understanding of people like you that like to act like judge, jury and goddess amongst mortals......

[Lake_Bi_Guy]

I don't belong to NRA but son does. How many NRA members have committed mass murders? My son has about 6 guns and of those he has two 22 rifles. One is like I had as kid and other has "cosmetic changes" that make it look like a military type. If changes go through, he will have one become illegal. Still has a couple of shotguns and a 30-30 which would still be legal. Those 2 are capable of much more deadly results in the hands of a mentally ill or just a horrible person.

[darkeyes]

so save the long winded hyperbole for somebody that gives a shit about your viewpoints.... you have jammed them down our throats for a few good years now, even to the point of telling people their life experiences are utter bollox because you think or your friends did........ and on the occasions when you have been asked to apologise when you have clearly been mistaken about something, you have refused to.......

so fran, in the immortal words of you, what utter tosh you posted.... complete self obsessed bollox....... .
Pot..kettle;)

..and I have frequently apologised in these forums and elsewhere when I have felt it right so to do..... simply because u feel an apology from me was due does not mean that an apology was merited...

[Long Duck Dong]

Pot..kettle;)

..and I have frequently apologised in these forums and elsewhere when I have felt it right so to do..... simply because u feel an apology from me was due does not mean that an apology was merited...


you accused me of saying women were mongrels, I corrected you on that when I pointed out that I was referring to mongrel mob women ( NZ gang members partners ) by the term they were called.... you told me I was the one at fault because I did not make it clear what i was talking about.....I pointed out when I has said I was talking about nz gangs.... I asked you to apologise for accusing me of saying women were mongrels.... you refused....

when I used a term of point, set and match, and you mistook it to be a tennis term.....I apologised for the misunderstanding over the term, not making myself clear and corrected the issue.....

when I posted my thread about my experiences in a NZ max security prison, you told me I was wrong cos in the uk your friends that had been in minimun / medium prisons.....
I pointed out that there was half a world between a NZ prison and a uk prison, and telling me that I had no idea what I was talking about, was offensive and rude and I would like a apology..... you refused.....

when I made a mistake over a uk law that I had read incorrectly and misquoted you on, I apologised for MY mistake and saying you were incorrect and corrected things in thread to show that I was wrong.....

when I was talking about my military experience, you told me that I was wrong for what I did in believing in my country, AFTER I had posted a number of times that i never stood up to serve my country...... when asked to correct what you said, you refused......

shall I continue with the list of apologizes that I am still waiting for....

[darkeyes]

you accused me of saying women were mongrels, I corrected you on that when I pointed out that I was referring to mongrel mob women ( NZ gang members partners ) by the term they were called.... you told me I was the one at fault because I did not make it clear what i was talking about.....I pointed out when I has said I was talking about nz gangs.... I asked you to apologise for accusing me of saying women were mongrels.... you refused....

when I used a term of point, set and match, and you mistook it to be a tennis term.....I apologised for the misunderstanding over the term, not making myself clear and corrected the issue.....

when I posted my thread about my experiences in a NZ max security prison, you told me I was wrong cos in the uk your friends that had been in minimun / medium prisons.....
I pointed out that there was half a world between a NZ prison and a uk prison, and telling me that I had no idea what I was talking about, was offensive and rude and I would like a apology..... you refused.....

when I made a mistake over a uk law that I had read incorrectly and misquoted you on, I apologised for MY mistake and saying you were incorrect and corrected things in thread to show that I was wrong.....

when I was talking about my military experience, you told me that I was wrong for what I did in believing in my country, AFTER I had posted a number of times that i never stood up to serve my country...... when asked to correct what you said, you refused......

shall I continue with the list of apologizes that I am still waiting for....
My "pot.. kettle" remark was not aimed at whether or not u apologise or not, Duckie... but at ur gall at calling me self obsessed.... I may well be.. but I am in the best of company...

[falcondfw]

and I've been to Russia. I am not sure what that has to do with anything.

A xenophobe is someone who hates foreigners. If she hates foreigners (especially Americans), why would she go to Seattle for a vacation and be amongst the foreigners she hates for a couple weeks?

[falcondfw]

I respect your opinion, Falcon, but the owners own actions contradict your statement.

Where has Drew weighed in on this thread? Tenni is not the owner. Drew is.

[darkeyes]

I will answer that Falcon.. it's rather mundane the answer.. my oldest friend lives in Seattle and she had been pestering me for some years to visit.. so I did finally .. and loved almost every minute of it.. and liked almost everyone I met.. I could defend at length accusations of xenophobia laid against me but won't... I stand on what I've written over the years about both racism and xenophobia for people to judge whether or not I am xenophobic..

Me m8 is moving back to the UK btw in a month or two.. and so won't be visiting Seattle again.. at least not to see her.. but I hope to visit the US again and have more fun and another enjoyable holiday.. if I can overcome my fear of flying and they let me in.. but an hour or 2 in the air to France or elsewhere in Europe is one thing.. 14 hours to Seattle was almost more than the nerves could take... and the same more or less back..

..but if I may pick u up on one thing.. many people visit other countries on holiday they don't like much and whose people they have contempt for.. large numbers of Britons do it all the time... France for one in Europe springs to mind... and many Commonwealth countries.. to some degree even the US.. and many visit other countries they h8 for more sinister reasons...but I am not such a person who does either however much others may believe it of me...:bigrin:

Because we dislike some aspects of a country, and say so, does not of itself make us xenophobic..

[falcondfw]

I will answer that Falcon.. it's rather mundane the answer.. my oldest friend lives in Seattle and she had been pestering me for some years to visit.. so I did finally .. and loved almost every minute of it.. and liked almost everyone I met.. I could defend at length accusations of xenophobia laid against me but won't... I stand on what I've written over the years about both racism and xenophobia for people to judge whether or not I am xenophobic..

Me m8 is moving back to the UK btw in a month or two.. and so won't be visiting Seattle again.. at least not to see her.. but I hope to visit the US again and have more fun and another enjoyable holiday.. if I can overcome my fear of flying and they let me in.. but an hour or 2 in the air to France or elsewhere in Europe is one thing.. 14 hours to Seattle was almost more than the nerves could take... and the same more or less back..

..but if I may pick u up on one thing.. many people visit other countries on holiday they don't like much and whose people they have contempt for.. large numbers of Britons do it all the time... France for one in Europe springs to mind... and many Commonwealth countries.. to some degree even the US.. and many visit other countries they h8 for more sinister reasons...but I am not such a person who does either however much others may believe it of me...:bigrin:

Because we dislike some aspects of a country, and say so, does not of itself make us xenophobic..

Fran, YOU ARE DEFEATING MY PURPOSE!!! lol.

You are not xenophobic. You have your views, which, in many cases, I disagree with. But that is fine.

I hope you do come back over here. There are so many things to see in this country.

Just book tours for wherever you come. In dallas, there are so many fantastic restaurants. And there is deely plaza (where Kennedy was killed).
In San antonio, there is the riverwalk, the alamo, and so many other things.
In Austin, there is the capitol and many other things.
In houston, there are so many different cultures and places to see.

But even if you do not come to Texas, there is Philly, with the liberty bell and independence hall and philly cheese steaks and hot pretzels
There is bostom with fanuel hall and fenway park and pubs and clam chowder.
There is New York with . . . just everything NYC offers.
There is Atlanta with the great southern culture.

There is a lot to see here and experience here. And I hope you will come back and enjoy.

[falcondfw]

Because we dislike some aspects of a country, and say so, does not of itself make us xenophobic..

Exactly. Disagreement is what the USA was built on. I have no problems with those who disagree. I have a BIG problem with those who harp on it over and over.

[tenni]

A lot of opinions have been posted but not a lot of historical facts. I found the following interesting.

Between December 14, 2012 (Newtown) and January 18, 2013, 1019 people have been killed by gun homicide in the USA.

This would be recent history.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_new town_sandy_hook_shooting.html?wpisrc=most_viral

There is a map indicating the locations of the gun murders. It has a interactive component that when you put your cursor over the figure representing the dead in a chart, it shows their name,age and city location.

I found the number of gun homicides nearly shocking since there is so much sadness over mass homicides. Since this thread is about gun homicides/gun control, other methods that people die is not really relevant. Since it is near double my country's actual gun homicides for an entire year, it is particularly disturbing. I know the populations are different but I also know the per 100 000 are three times greater.

Dare I write that it almost seems anti-humane and definitely anti-human to use this tool to kill your own kind in such numbers. Now isn't that anti-American to continue to permit killing your own citizens on purpose!!!! Freedom to live ramble aside.

(brainstorming) Maybe all purchasers of guns should be required to write out a thousand times, I know that if I use this tool that I will kill and end the life of another human or living creature. Or at least put a message on the gun barrel, gun handle warning, this tool's purpose is to kill..sort of like warnings on cigarette packages. Or are some still arguing that smoking does not kill..sorta like the gun is a tool argument. ;)

"most people do not use tenni's own issues with brain damage against him" (personal attack rule 2 by a no gun control supporter) Wtf you're posting such shitty lies. I have no brain damage or cognitive impairment. I can usually articulately write and analyse far better than you sir.

[gen11]

Interesting how, except for a few of the later posts, this thread has degenerated from a discussion about firearms and fact to personal acrimony. From what I can see, it's the anti-gun side who started the dragging-down by name-calling supporters of gun rights.

[tenni]

Out of the 195 independent, sovereign states in the world, the USA, Mexico, Haiti, and Guatemala are the only four countries with any reference to firearms in their constitution.

Only the USA and Guatemala have broad inclusion of the right to bear arms.

Guatemala ranks fourth for the total number of firearms deaths. Mexico ranks sixth for the total number of firearms deaths. The USA ranks tenth for the total number of firearms deaths. Haiti was not listed in the comparison that I was using.

[Gearbox]

Interesting how, except for a few of the later posts, this thread has degenerated from a discussion about firearms and fact to personal acrimony. From what I can see, it's the anti-gun side who started the dragging-down by name-calling supporters of gun rights.

Voltaire: I don't know of you're speaking the truth about being a "professional historian" or not, but IF you are, you're flat-ass LYING about the intent of the Second Amendment.
Historical facts for you.:rolleyes:

[tenni]

opps

"Since it is near double my country's actual gun homicides for an entire year," should read "Since it is near double my country's actual total homicides(guns, knives, beatings etc.) for an entire year,

[Gearbox]

gearbox... and yes, I am sticking my nose in cos my name was mentioned...... how many people post their opinions of other countries, cultures, beliefs, and resort to implied opinions that people that have a certain belief or understanding, are mentally impaired, delusional, brainwashed or in some way, inferior to other people by way of sexuality or gender.... cos most people can immediately name one person.....
You can demonise one person in particular if you want, and add that little extra to enforce it. But if you realy want to dish out blame for those things, you'll be a very busy man if you chose to be fair.

I am not american, yet you and tenni implied the NZ police force were idiots cos I have a firearms license... the NZ firearms law is what the US is looking at adopting....so if its good enuf for america to look seriously at our laws and not those of canada or the UK, then we must have the types of laws that work best in the US's eyes.... that makes me proud of my countries laws and more supportive of them..... and question why the UK and canada are not making the same impression with the US
To be blunt:- Your not exactly a Poster Boy for NZ's gun laws yourself. I don't know how you managed to get a license with a criminal record, but even so, you reject the laws that don't suit you, such as the safekeeping of the firearm. Your NOT supporting those laws for what they are! But IMO for how leniant NZ can be.
There are no plans for the UK or Canada to adopt those laws, thankfully.

I can only assume that the US mentally impaired gun owners and people that want more gun control laws are seeing that the mentally impaired nz police force are using laws that allow mentally impaired people to possess firearms in accordance with NZ law.... and that would mean that the brainwashed american people that believe in the right to bear arms but also the right to be safe in their own country, must have the same level of lower level IQ as other gun owners around the world that would like to see the mentally impaired and brainwashed in the US agree that the new laws may work if they can get them thru...
I can't make sense of that. If you are saying that NZ gun laws allow the mentaly impaired to own firearms, and that is why America thinks that's a good thing, then I hope you are wrong.

there is no way in hell that intelligent people would want more gun control laws, americans and other gun owners live in fear and are too mentally impaired and brainwashed, to want something that is of benefit to so many....... tenni is most vocal about how people are incapable of such thinking, specially in america..... and that is why canada is such a peaceful and safe place, yet I would have more chance of being shot and killed in canada than I would in NZ.....
There's no way in Hell that paranoid people would want more gun control laws, you mean? Has little to do with inteligence. You just pointed out that Tenni lives in a MORE violent society (in your opinion). Yet Tenni doesn't own a firearm and feels pretty safe there. You on the other hand sleep with a gun next to you in fear of attack in your 'safer' inviroment.
Something doesn't add up there. One of you are not being rational about your inviroment. Maybe Tenni should get a gun?:tongue:

[gladius]

I love a robust debate. Even with tossing a mug across the room, at some snickering fool. Where did that come from? It was on a port of call in Liverpool, England, of course. In all of the countries I've been in, no where on Earth, have I ever seen such a rancorous lot than the British. They may have disarmed you, but damn if you can't improvise. It actually is worse than you're thinking. Her Majesties Ships were in port, in Norfolk, VA. We had around 17 nations represented for the largest armada since the D Day invasion going to Europe. The E Club on the base, on one particular night, just before deployment, must have had over a thousand sailors and Marines in it......and lo and behold, who starts the stomping on the tables, singing........the British. No shit, a fight breaks out.....something in those nasty songs you Brits sing, just didn't go well with some of the Germans in attendance. It gets better. In the largest military operation since Operation Overlord, in Schleswig, Germany......American Marines and soldiers had to pry you Brits from the German infantry. It's not about gun control, is what I'm trying to make funny here, it's the human spirit for just fugging things up for everyone else.

[chicagom]

....and then a spaceship lands........

[gladius]

....and then a spaceship lands........


Are you bored?

[Long Duck Dong]

You can demonise one person in particular if you want, and add that little extra to enforce it. But if you realy want to dish out blame for those things, you'll be a very busy man if you chose to be fair.

To be blunt:- Your not exactly a Poster Boy for NZ's gun laws yourself. I don't know how you managed to get a license with a criminal record, but even so, you reject the laws that don't suit you, such as the safekeeping of the firearm. Your NOT supporting those laws for what they are! But IMO for how leniant NZ can be.
There are no plans for the UK or Canada to adopt those laws, thankfully.

I can't make sense of that. If you are saying that NZ gun laws allow the mentaly impaired to own firearms, and that is why America thinks that's a good thing, then I hope you are wrong.

There's no way in Hell that paranoid people would want more gun control laws, you mean? Has little to do with inteligence. You just pointed out that Tenni lives in a MORE violent society (in your opinion). Yet Tenni doesn't own a firearm and feels pretty safe there. You on the other hand sleep with a gun next to you in fear of attack in your 'safer' inviroment.
Something doesn't add up there. One of you are not being rational about your inviroment. Maybe Tenni should get a gun?:tongue:

I have put up with 4 years of being demonised by way of my mental illness, sexuality, intersex nature, sexual experience, partner choice, relationship style.... etc..... lol I am sure that its not going to end any time soon...... so you and tenni can tag team all you want....

I am not a poster boy, you got that right... and yes there are not plans for the UK or canada to have as strict gun control laws as NZ has.... but the US is looking at them closely...... as for how I got my license ... agreed, you do not know, but you are quick to tear what you do not know anything about, to pieces, when, by your own admittance, you know nothing about it......

the uk allows mentally ill people to drive cars, have jobs, hell... even teach in schools and use guns... ( fran you are proof that people with depression are not all risks to society but can greatly improve society ).... and so a mentally ill person is not always a person that is mentally impaired.... as tenni would know cos of the brain damage from the spike to his left temple that left him unable to walk for a year ( he posted about it in this site )...... my depression has never affected me in that way nor has it impaired my reasoning in regards to firearms..... unlike the sane people that go hunting and shoot their best mates .....


so again, and either you have amnesia or you both are just plain ignorant .... I support the gun control laws that the US is looking at.. they exist in my own country so I have clear proof of how they can work and fail.... UNLIKE canada and the UK who do not have the laws as you gleefully pointed out...... and I guess as a * sane * person that supports gun laws, either you stand with me and other mentally ill people in support of the gun control law changes... or you don't.... you stand with the sane people cos omg... who wants to believe that mentally ill people have working brains and the ability to make informed choices, the same as sane people......

btw, ever noticed that the person going on about gun owners living in fear... lives in the closet himself.... so I guess that they know a lot about living in fear....

[Long Duck Dong]

are these people UK or canada anti gun advocates ?

12361

[goldenfinger]

Out of the 195 independent, sovereign states in the world, the USA, Mexico, Haiti, and Guatemala are the only four countries with any reference to firearms in their constitution.

Only the USA and Guatemala have broad inclusion of the right to bear arms.

Guatemala ranks fourth for the total number of firearms deaths. Mexico ranks sixth for the total number of firearms deaths. The USA ranks tenth for the total number of firearms deaths. Haiti was not listed in the comparison that I was using.

I believe the US constitution does NOT use the word firearms, just arms, and that is the problem.
As I have said before, when today's most powerful weapon becomes tomorrows least powerful weapon , they still claim a right to own it under the constitution.

The constitution and the bible is truly playing with peoples mind.
I'm glad them and not me.

[gladius]

are these people UK or canada anti gun advocates ?

12361

OH SNAP! Perfect. LOL

[Long Duck Dong]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/oddstuff/8203508/Seized-bullets-and-guns-become-bling

I love this idea..... a statement against guns can take many forms....

[void()]

Xenophobia (http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/xenophobia) would appear to match someone debasing the U.S. culture, especially if they are Canadian and have a handle of tenni. Apologies, not attempting to name call. Merely observing and seeing what is, is. Note, I say it appears to match. Guess I may be in error, guess tenni's actions would be evidence either way.

Conversely, one might have a fear of new ideas and be a xenophobe. I do not fear the idea of gun control, rather see it as not really a valid method to end violent crime. Tools are tools. Shoot I could beat someone to death bare handed. Going to ban me from having hands? And yes, I know some folks whom are required to 'register' their hands as lethal weapons.

It is not the tool but the intention behind it which needs addressed. Presenting affront to another nation's culture out of xenophobic fear is not the way to do that, no matter if it is wrapped up in polite ribbons and bows or not. It especially is not the way on an internet forum.

Try emigrating, working the political system ... maybe if lucky you'd get your change. I doubt it, what with the state of elected officials being no more than PR guys for corporations or big money interests. But that method stands better chance than b__ing on an internet forum and aggravating members of the nation you affront.

Sure we can discuss, debate all we want and that's fine. But when all there remains is differing opinion, no further point to debate or discuss. No one will be persuaded from their own opinion, nor will they persuade others. And no proof needs offered from either opinion as they are subjective beliefs as I've defined earlier. What's left?

Agree to disagree and walk away. Move on to another subject or topic. I have been avoiding the site because I see lots of quibbling over petty dung. And it's normally the same batch of folks doing the quibbling, stirring it up. It serves no purpose really except written sparring rounds and urination wars. That's the hallmarks of insecurity, immaturity. Don't need or want that in my life. I struggle enough as it is just being me, thanks.

Figure most are in similar boats. So, I go on and live as best able. I find other 'distractions' or just go help out around the house/home. It is much more pleasant to not be engaged here. Grants you more clarity upon reading the threads, better perspective. Imagine that! Breathing and living beyond an internet forum, and it helps grant a little peace, a sense of calm and well being. Wow, huh?

[rickoyler1969]

TRUE GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE INTENDED TARGET WHEN YOU PULL THE TRIGGER.

[darkeyes]

The stigma of mental illness, and the prejudice those who endure or have endured mental illness is something I have combated all of my adult life... those of us who have been diagnosed with a mental illness are looked on with suspicion and some hostility by the general population.. and yet it is doubtful whatever many of us have not suffered from some kind of mental disorder in our lives.. depression and being depressed are not the same thing, yet both are conditions of the mind.. few consider being depressed as being ill. I have suffered recurrent bouts of depression and have been depressed, and know the difference between the 2... one is far more serious than the other and some who endure depression can be a danger to both themselves and those around them... not always, indeed relatively rarely through violence against another and a wish to harm or worse, but the condition can be such that caring about one's well-being and safety, and that of those around us is not to the forefront of our mind while the condition persists..

We should always be wary of discriminating unfairly against any who suffers from a mental condition.. most of us, even those with the most serious mental disorders are little or no danger to any, either themselves or others.. but some are... and so British firearm and shotgun law is framed to recognise this and any who suffer from recent serious mental disorders or illnesses are refused certificates to own either. This does not mean anyone who has suffered from such a condition or indeed something considered a minor mental disorder, and there are appeals procedures where an applicant refused a certificate may appeal to the Crown Court in England, or the Sheriff in Scotland for the refusal to be overturned. What is judged serious is not defined, and often those who most would consider unlikely to turn their weapons on others, or themselves are refused certificates.. such people can and do appeal and such people have that appeal upheld.. occasionally on the other side of the coin, some who are patently unstable and should not be granted a licence are granted them... and occasionally with unhappy consequences.. but then many who are adjudged to be no danger, and who have had no medical history of mental illness have run amok and there have been several nasty incidents with substantial loss of life.. Thomas Hamilton was one such at Dunblane. No medical history of mental illness does not mean there is none in reality.. many go undiagnosed, often because of the fear of stigma, or because of the fear of consequences at work. Some kinds of mental illness such as Schizophrenia debar people for many kids of work.. government service for one... teaching and working with children.. it is therefore unsurprising that many who suffer form mental disorders never have them diagnosed.

Firearms and Shotgun certificates last 5 years and may be withdrawn at any time if a person is deemed to have become a danger to society whether or not that person suffers from a medically diagnosed mental condition.. discussions are on going between the police and the BMA about such people being reportable should they possess firearm or shotgun certificates. Usually however GPs do not know whether a patient has a firearm because there is no record available to them from the Police and so many slip through the net. Consideration is being given to such a record being created to enable GPs to alert the authorities of any citizen who they consider may have such a mental disorder that they have become a danger to self or others. Patient confidentiality is certainly an issue, but there are certain reportable illnesses now where GPs have a statutory duty to report them to a central authority.. epilepsy for Drivers must be reported to the DVLA at Swansea and a driving licence withdrawn with serious consequences in respect of many peoples work and every day life.. it is considered an issue of public safety.

This post is not intended as pro or anti people with mental conditions being hounded any more than they are... I am uncomfortable with statements raising others mental conditions. yet know that a person's mental suitability must be taken into account on an issue such as firearms and those adjudged as dangers to society or themselves should be refused access to such weapons..... a person's mental suitablity is not something that can or should be ignored.. this is merely a statement of how things are in the UK.. how things are is imperfect and always shall be but that things should be tightened up and how we deal with the granting of firearms and shotgun certificates I have not the slightest doubt... and we cannot ignore the mentally ill and whether or not they are suitable to hold such certificates... there are good and sound reasons why some people with or who have had mental conditions are refused certificates, but as the law stands can we justifiably refuse all in the same way as epileptics are refused driving licences or have them revoked..., identifying those who have never been diagnosed with mental illness who may be a danger to society, that is an altogether different thing and far more difficult, yet it is not a challenge we should refuse however impossible it may seem. the very difficulty of protecting society from gun crime from either the medically diagnosed mentally ill, non diagnosed or alleged sane tells me that strict control is necessary and that is generally how the people in these islands feel..

As long as firearms exist and are allowed to be owned by ordinary citizens, whether strictly controlled and regulated or otherwise, we need to determine as best we are able who is most likely to be a danger to others.. not all the mentally ill are or will be.. just as not all the so called sane are good little boys and girls and will never be a danger to their fellow citizens..... and I make no apology for repeating that in my view is an argument for restricting and regulating their availability in society, not making them more freely available.

[Gearbox]

I have put up with 4 years of being demonised by way of my mental illness, sexuality, intersex nature, sexual experience, partner choice, relationship style.... etc..... lol I am sure that its not going to end any time soon...... so you and tenni can tag team all you want....
You've been qustioned for your behaviour on the net. That happens on the net apparently. No, realy it does!:rolleyes:

I am not a poster boy, you got that right... and yes there are not plans for the UK or canada to have as strict gun control laws as NZ has.... but the US is looking at them closely...... as for how I got my license ... agreed, you do not know, but you are quick to tear what you do not know anything about, to pieces, when, by your own admittance, you know nothing about it......
We know not how you got your gun licence in such a strict gun licence country. How on Earth did you manage it?
The US might want to look at those laws a LOT closer.

the uk allows mentally ill people to drive cars, have jobs, hell... even teach in schools and use guns... ( fran you are proof that people with depression are not all risks to society but can greatly improve society ).... and so a mentally ill person is not always a person that is mentally impaired.... as tenni would know cos of the brain damage from the spike to his left temple that left him unable to walk for a year ( he posted about it in this site )...... my depression has never affected me in that way nor has it impaired my reasoning in regards to firearms..... unlike the sane people that go hunting and shoot their best mates .....
This is the definition of 'Mentally Impaired':-
"(in England, according to the Mental Health Act 1983) a state of arrested or incomplete development of mind, which includes significant impairment of intelligence and social functioning and is associated with abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct.".
As a self professed ex-councilor I assumed you knew the difference between 'mentally ill' and 'mentally impaired'. Maybe it has a different definition in NZ?
To my knowledge neither Fran nor Tenni has found themselve convicted for acts of violence nor cases of serious irresponsibility. So we can breath a sigh of relief that they are most probably no threats to society. However, if that wasn't the case, I'd hope to God they didn't find a way to get themselves a firearm! Jezuz Christmas on a bike! How worrying would THAT be?:yikes2:

so again, and either you have amnesia or you both are just plain ignorant .... I support the gun control laws that the US is looking at.. they exist in my own country so I have clear proof of how they can work and fail.... UNLIKE canada and the UK who do not have the laws as you gleefully pointed out...... and I guess as a * sane * person that supports gun laws, either you stand with me and other mentally ill people in support of the gun control law changes... or you don't.... you stand with the sane people cos omg... who wants to believe that mentally ill people have working brains and the ability to make informed choices, the same as sane people......
I ignore very little, I remember quite a lot, I fully support the mentally ill and wish them all the help they can get in a caring society.
I must point out that the mentally ill are not insane and your distinction between the two is dead wrong! I'd assume you'd know that, given your claims. And as for pro-gun being pro-mentaly ill, that's just silly! Very VERY silly, irrisponsible nonsense!
You'd get my vote as anti-gun Poster Boy any day!:tongue:

btw, ever noticed that the person going on about gun owners living in fear... lives in the closet himself.... so I guess that they know a lot about living in fear....
No guns next to most closeted bi's & gays beds. It's usually condoms & lube. Thank fek!

[tenni]

Post 122
This seems to be historical fact that a conflict may break out and without guns no one was killed. Fists may inflict injury but are less likely to make it a homicide than use of a gun.
Post 126
“are these people UK or canada anti gun advocates ?”

Not necessarily against gun control laws though. Some still live off the land and trap and hunt and in particular Indigenous peoples. Far fewer indigenous survive only through hunting/trapping than go to the store to get food. Even in the Arctic, with cities like Iqualuit there is a store with food such as bananas. Most people in Canada live in urban environments and shop for meat at a store not with a gun.

As far as New Zealand having better gun control laws than Canada or Britain, that is yet to be proven. Total gun deaths are higher in New Zealand than Canada ,England/ Wales and Scotland. It may be best in its own thread.

.................................................. ....
Post 125 makes absolutely no reference to Historical fact about gun control imo
“as tenni would know cos of the brain damage from the spike to his left temple that left him unable to walk for a year ( he posted about it in this site ).. “

First, mental illness is not the same as brain damage. People who have strokes are not mentally ill but have brain damage.

Second, being unable to walk does not necessarily mean brain damage. Having a head trauma can have impact on the body other than the brain although most often may involve the brain.
......................................
Mentally ill people depending upon the mental illness should not have access to firearms and Canada’s screening tries to deal with this. I agree that a depressed person is not necessarily mentally ill either. Clinical depression is another matter and if there is the possibility of suicide not permitted a gun license. PSTD is another mental illness that may be dangerous to permit a gun license to a person with PSTD(may vary). An ex con who was imprisoned for killing someone should probably not have a firearm permit. In Canada, it may mean that the person would be denied a firearm license. I don’t know as I’m not an gun licensing expert at all.


off topic and LDD focused cuz that is what he really wants...lol
To be quite blunt there are a few people who upon reading that LDD has a gun weapon beside his bed (loaded was the implication) are concerned. His posts often indicate reasons for their concern.
Once again, LDD tries refocusing a thread towards himself rather than the thread topic as trolls are inclined to do. He plays the victim troll yet once again.

[Long Duck Dong]

The stigma of mental illness, and the prejudice those who endure or have endured mental illness is something I have combated all of my adult life... those of us who have been diagnosed with a mental illness are looked on with suspicion and some hostility by the general population.. and yet it is doubtful whatever many of us have not suffered from some kind of mental disorder in our lives.. depression and being depressed are not the same thing, yet both are conditions of the mind.. few consider being depressed as being ill. I have suffered recurrent bouts of depression and have been depressed, and know the difference between the 2... one is far more serious than the other and some who endure depression can be a danger to both themselves and those around them... not always, indeed relatively rarely through violence against another and a wish to harm or worse, but the condition can be such that caring about one's well-being and safety, and that of those around us is not to the forefront of our mind while the condition persists..

We should always be wary of discriminating unfairly against any who suffers from a mental condition.. most of us, even those with the most serious mental disorders are little or no danger to any, either themselves or others.. but some are... and so British firearm and shotgun law is framed to recognise this and any who suffer from recent serious mental disorders or illnesses are refused certificates to own either. This does not mean anyone who has suffered from such a condition or indeed something considered a minor mental disorder, and there are appeals procedures where an applicant refused a certificate may appeal to the Crown Court in England, or the Sheriff in Scotland for the refusal to be overturned. What is judged serious is not defined, and often those who most would consider unlikely to turn their weapons on others, or themselves are refused certificates.. such people can and do appeal and such people have that appeal upheld.. occasionally on the other side of the coin, some who are patently unstable and should not be granted a licence are granted them... and occasionally with unhappy consequences.. but then many who are adjudged to be no danger, and who have had no medical history of mental illness have run amok and there have been several nasty incidents with substantial loss of life.. Thomas Hamilton was one such at Dunblane. No medical history of mental illness does not mean there is none in reality.. many go undiagnosed, often because of the fear of stigma, or because of the fear of consequences at work. Some kinds of mental illness such as Schizophrenia debar people for many kids of work.. government service for one... teaching and working with children.. it is therefore unsurprising that many who suffer form mental disorders never have them diagnosed.

Firearms and Shotgun certificates last 5 years and may be withdrawn at any time if a person is deemed to have become a danger to society whether or not that person suffers from a medically diagnosed mental condition.. discussions are on going between the police and the BMA about such people being reportable should they possess firearm or shotgun certificates. Usually however GPs do not know whether a patient has a firearm because there is no record available to them from the Police and so many slip through the net. Consideration is being given to such a record being created to enable GPs to alert the authorities of any citizen who they consider may have such a mental disorder that they have become a danger to self or others. Patient confidentiality is certainly an issue, but there are certain reportable illnesses now where GPs have a statutory duty to report them to a central authority.. epilepsy for Drivers must be reported to the DVLA at Swansea and a driving licence withdrawn with serious consequences in respect of many peoples work and every day life.. it is considered an issue of public safety.

This post is not intended as pro or anti people with mental conditions being hounded any more than they are... I am uncomfortable with statements raising others mental conditions. yet know that a person's mental suitability must be taken into account on an issue such as firearms and those adjudged as dangers to society or themselves should be refused access to such weapons..... a person's mental suitablity is not something that can or should be ignored.. this is merely a statement of how things are in the UK.. how things are is imperfect and always shall be but that things should be tightened up and how we deal with the granting of firearms and shotgun certificates I have not the slightest doubt... and we cannot ignore the mentally ill and whether or not they are suitable to hold such certificates... there are good and sound reasons why some people with or who have had mental conditions are refused certificates, but as the law stands can we justifiably refuse all in the same way as epileptics are refused driving licences or have them revoked..., identifying those who have never been diagnosed with mental illness who may be a danger to society, that is an altogether different thing and far more difficult, yet it is not a challenge we should refuse however impossible it may seem. the very difficulty of protecting society from gun crime from either the medically diagnosed mentally ill, non diagnosed or alleged sane tells me that strict control is necessary and that is generally how the people in these islands feel..

As long as firearms exist and are allowed to be owned by ordinary citizens, whether strictly controlled and regulated or otherwise, we need to determine as best we are able who is most likely to be a danger to others.. not all the mentally ill are or will be.. just as not all the so called sane are good little boys and girls and will never be a danger to their fellow citizens..... and I make no apology for repeating that in my view is an argument for restricting and regulating their availability in society, not making them more freely available.
.

I live in a society where they lock the most violent criminals up.... but not a society where we lock the mentally illness for the protection of society... those days are gone, thank god.... and its the * sane * people that used to lock them up to * keep society safe *.......
I am free today, thanks to the people like you, fran, that dared to stand up for us...... and freed us from the prisons / mental hospitals created by the *sane * people like
tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber

like the chains of slavery, there are still chains around our necks, hands and feet, cos of some people that still fail to realise that they are the greatest threat to people cos they keep wanting to keep the chains around people.... and its not the guns or the mentally ill that are a threat to them......

viva la mentally ill people... they prove just how much of a risk, the sane people are to the rest of the world, and have been to the rest of the world, and will continue to be to the rest of the world......

guns may be a risk to health and safety... but sane people are a risk to freedom and the right to live and be free....


thank you for the info about the UK gun laws, and the firearm / shotgun 5 year cert thing.... I have not really bothered to look in depth at the uk gun laws.... but that has my interest now......

[Orlando157]

Oh !!! --- I thought it was gum control ........ nevermind

[Long Duck Dong]

gear box and tenni......

1) I got my license through the correct channels, its a legal weapon..... finished insulting the NZ police for certifying me as competent to have a firearms license ? cos they would know more about me, my mental health and my risk to society, than two untrained, experience lacking, non NZ residents with no history of military / police firearms training, that like to think that they are experts in fields that they know fuck all about, other than their newspapers and movies...

2) your judgemental, insulting and offensive remarks can reach around the world and hurt people.... my gun has a maximum range of 130 metres...... who is safer in their chairs behind their computers from the effects of your remarks v's my bullets.....

3) if you wanted the thread to say on topic, then why post all the off topic posts and use my name in your posts.......

4) if you think that al I want to do is be a victim.... then why are you using me for target practice ? would that not be empowerment and enabling a person to be a victim by your own hand ?

5) I know what comes out of my mouth and from my fingers, I am responsible for that.... I am not responsible for your inability to understand and comprehend things

6) as for gun safety etc...... I am armed with firearms knowledge and experience, you are armed with a lack of knowledge, experience..... I like to believe that I am safer cos I know how to deal with a gun, even a illegal one, and I can safety transport it to the police station...... who would you have to call to deal with a firearm ?

7) there are monuments full of the names of people like me and fran and others that fight for what we believe in.... there are forums full of the posts of people like you both that just fight with people...... one group brought freedom and peace to much of the world.... the other group make sure there never will be

[tenni]

gum control...lol :bdaygrin:

post 135 & 137 off topic attention whoring.

[Gearbox]

I live in a society where they lock the most violent criminals up.... but not a society where we lock the mentally illness for the protection of society... those days are gone, thank god.... and its the * sane * people that used to lock them up to * keep society safe *.......
I am free today, thanks to the people like you, fran, that dared to stand up for us...... and freed us from the prisons / mental hospitals created by the *sane * people like tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber.
Firstly, you were locked up for causing the deaths of people, NOT for being mentaly ill! You were not a part in any 'sane Vs mentaly ill' war! And I have to point out once again that the mentaly ill are NOT insane! So count the mentaly ill in with the sane if that's not too much of a hindrence for your martyrdom!
Secondly, it's a bad thing to be 'sane' now? FEK!:confused:

like the chains of slavery, there are still chains around our necks, hands and feet, cos of some people that still fail to realise that they are the greatest threat to people cos they keep wanting to keep the chains around people.... and its not the guns or the mentally ill that are a threat to them......
Sane people are bad?

viva la mentally ill people... they prove just how much of a risk, the sane people are to the rest of the world, and have been to the rest of the world, and will continue to be to the rest of the world......
Sane peole are Nazi's now?

guns may be a risk to health and safety... but sane people are a risk to freedom and the right to live and be free....
?

[DuckiesDarling]

Firstly, you were locked up for causing the deaths of people, NOT for being mentaly ill! You were not a part in any 'sane Vs mentaly ill' war! And I have to point out once again that the mentaly ill are NOT insane! So count the mentaly ill in with the sane if that's not too much of a hindrence for your martyrdom!
Secondly, it's a bad thing to be 'sane' now? FEK!:confused:

Sane people are bad?

Sane peole are Nazi's now?

?

Ever heard of Godwin's Law... you lose.

[falcondfw]

..and so we make it easy for them?:eek2:

No. We make it easy for people to defend themselves against criminals with guns.

[Gearbox]

1) I got my license through the correct channels, its a legal weapon..... finished insulting the NZ police for certifying me as competent to have a firearms license ? cos they would know more about me, my mental health and my risk to society, than two untrained, experience lacking, non NZ residents with no history of military / police firearms training, that like to think that they are experts in fields that they know fuck all about, other than their newspapers and movies...
So that's cleared up the mystery of how you obtained a gun license? I'm 'sane' remember!:rolleyes:
I was also an infantry soldier who could strip n assemble a rifle quicker that you could count your blessings. That has sod all to do with anybodies opinion of the NZ police who issued YOU a license! Be very sure that I'd be amongst the first to question them if I were a neighbour of yours!

2) your judgemental, insulting and offensive remarks can reach around the world and hurt people.... my gun has a maximum range of 130 metres...... who is safer in their chairs behind their computers from the effects of your remarks v's my bullets.....
It's who's safe within 130 mtrs of you that I'd be more concerned about. Your judgement is OFF, your insults are OFF and your an offense to any that regards themselves 'sane'.

3) if you wanted the thread to say on topic, then why post all the off topic posts and use my name in your posts.......
You deviously post absurd claims that get you attention to feed your persecution. Troll you may be, but gone unquestioned, such as the mentally ill being insane, some may believe it to be true. That is how your usual methods to divert topics to you go. Well done!

4) if you think that al I want to do is be a victim.... then why are you using me for target practice ? would that not be empowerment and enabling a person to be a victim by your own hand ?
See No 3.

5) I know what comes out of my mouth and from my fingers, I am responsible for that.... I am not responsible for your inability to understand and comprehend things
No, your not responsible at all! Nothing you type needs to make fluid sense to get what your after.

6) as for gun safety etc...... I am armed with firearms knowledge and experience, you are armed with a lack of knowledge, experience..... I like to believe that I am safer cos I know how to deal with a gun, even a illegal one, and I can safety transport it to the police station...... who would you have to call to deal with a firearm ?
Once again, I'm an ex infantry soldier. I am not impressed with your juvinile lack of firearm safety as you keep it next to your bed. Precautions are there for a damn good reason!

7) there are monuments full of the names of people like me and fran and others that fight for what we believe in.... there are forums full of the posts of people like you both that just fight with people...... one group brought freedom and peace to much of the world.... the other group make sure there never will be
Seriously get a grip! Your in a martyr fantasy pisstake of reality. In THIS reality some who you'd grant 'freedom' to, walk into schools with semi-automatic rifles and kill 'sane' people. And YOU got the pathetic lack of consciounse to claim persecuted martyr? Seek help! Do yourself a favour!

[falcondfw]

In Canada few B&E have a gun involved. There are some deaths due to B&E without guns but I suspect that the numbers are far fewer than the US. Gun deaths due to B&E are also not that much on the minds of most people in Canada. That would vary in communities where there are a lot of illegal guns though. Illegal use of guns seem to happen more frequently in gang shootings.



The use of per capita ie for each 100 000 people evens out the comparison from country to country regardless of their population.

Number of gun deaths may go up and down but this reporting with countries ranking as listed has been fairly consistent over ten years plus. The stats are not about the US but the world stats on gun deaths and guns in the country.

It happens that the US falls within higher placement in the issue of gun deaths. It happens that the US has the most guns per 100 000 people of the population compared to other countries. The US (88,800 per 100, 000 citizens) has nearly twice the numbers of gun owners than Switzerland (45,700 per 100, 000 citizens). The US (88,800 per 100,000 citizens) compared to second place Serbia (58,200 per 100,000 citizens) As some people may possess multiple weapons while others possess none, this number is not a representation of the percentage of people who possess guns in each country.

If, in your own words, this number is not a representation of the people who possess guns in each country, then why even bring it up? It is not relevant to the discussion and only serves to further your bash America attitude.

[falcondfw]

'Violent crime' can be anything from threatening violence, car theft, pub brawls, burgulary and vandalism to murder. It is not homicide!
The most reported 'violent crime' in England & Wales is vandelism. Kids being twats.:rolleyes:
As we are in a 'Big Brother' culture, we tend to be 999 happy, and get the police to do their jobs. What we don't do is carry firearms to do their jobs for them out of a no confidence view of law enforcement.
This, the 'reasearcher' in the vid completely forgot to 'research' in his vid. BUT he does have an exellent sollution to the trouble spots there:- get the police and politicians to do their jobs!
He hit on another thing too, that things are not as bad in America as your led to believe. Paranoia and insecurity is blatantly encouraged by media AND by pro-gun enthusiasts. No place is 'safe' with that going on in anybodies heads.

Hmmmm. "Do their jobs for them." When a gunman is standing in a theater with handguns and a SEMI-automatic rifle right now and the cops are 5 minutes away, how many people do you think will die before they get there? How many will die if one or two theater patrons are concealed handgun license holders who are properly trained in the use of firearms?

[Long Duck Dong]

Firstly, you were locked up for causing the deaths of people, NOT for being mentaly ill! You were not a part in any 'sane Vs mentaly ill' war! And I have to point out once again that the mentaly ill are NOT insane! So count the mentaly ill in with the sane if that's not too much of a hindrence for your martyrdom!
Secondly, it's a bad thing to be 'sane' now? FEK!:confused:

Sane people are bad?

Sane peole are Nazi's now?

?


1) I was not talking about my prison sentence, I was refering to the way that mentally ill people used to be treated by * sane * people... but I kinda fiqured that you would know a lil history about electro shock therapy, lobotomies, forced restraints, excess medding, mental conditioning and the other forms of cruel and unusual treatment that * sane * people put the mentally ill thru.....

2) what was the charge against me and why did I do time ? I did time yes, but I have never said what I was charged with or why the sentence was overturned on appeal... btw, that was 20 years ago, I was diagnosed with depression in 07, the NZ firearms laws were done in 2003. and I voluntarily redid my license cos of nay sayers like you and tenni that think I should not have a gun.....

3) count the mentaly ill in with the sane I agree, .....so could you and tenni stop using mental illness as a reason why people should not have guns and as a way of defining people that believe in their constitution as having mental illness issues...... unless you are going to include, having kids, owning homes, having jobs, breathing the same air to the list that mentally ill people should not be allowed to do cos they may place you at greater risk than a sane person..... BTW, the majority of non spree shootings, are done by people without a history of mental illness..... and the majority of spree shooters are not found to be insane by reason of mental illness, but legally insane by way of defination


the biggest risk that people face from the mentally illness, is often cos you and others bully them until they snap and got on a rampage, or they implode and take their own lives..... and what I find ironic, is the hunter up north, that was vocal about how mentally ill people with guns, were so dangerous, was the same hunter that shot and killed a school teacher, cos he was out drunk with his mates, and doing spotlight hunting at night and failed to ID his target..... he is one of a group of people that are anti mentally ill people having guns.... one has killed somebody, 4 have been involved in accidental shootings, one has been involved in a criminal shooting... and 2 have lost their firearms licences for serious infringements such as reckless endangerment with a firearm ( one had a 8 year old using a firearm unsupervised....)

so yeah, keep it up with the crap....

what really stands out, is that i am actively supporting the US firearms laws by signing a personal handwritten letter of support for the US gun laws, that will be sent to the NZ guns owners association and they in turn will send a batch of letters to the US, as a way of showing that NZ gun owners support changes to US gun laws.....
now as 2 opinionated and judgemental non gun owners or users..... what are you doing to show your support for gun control other than trying to be the sites biggest cyber bullies ?

[falcondfw]

Okay, so let's follow your example of the car. Lots of people die in road accidents but no one is arguing that the government should ban the ownership and use of cars. But there are strict laws and controls in place to make the roads safer and limit the number of fatalities- you have to pass a test and prove you are fit to drive before you are granted a license, and there are laws around speeding, dangerous driving, DWI and the design of vehicles which are strictly enforced. So why are the pro gun advocates so up in arms about tighter laws controlling the use of guns? The vast majority of those in favor of stricter gun control are not suggesting that guns be banned- no one is arguing against every american's right to own a hand gun to protect him or herself. What is proposed is the banning of automatic rifles that can fire 100 bullets a minute and cause untold death and destruction, and the tougher enforcement of background checks. The statistics in this thread are interesting but as with all stats, you can twist them any way you like to make your point. The undeniable fact is that no civilized nation on this planet, other than the US, tolerates or legally allows the civilian ownership of these military style weapons of mass destruction. No responsible person can rationalize why they would need to own weapons of that sort to protect themselves.

No Spring,
What is proposed is the banning of some SEMI-automatic weapons. There is a big difference. Fully automatic lets you hold the trigger down and spray a mass of bullets everywhere. SEMI-automatic weapons you have to pull the trigger for each bullet fired. The AR-15, as you can buy it from a store, is a SEMI-automatic weapon.
I am not opposed to background checks. In fact, I FAVOR both background checks and mandatory training. But some of the proposals seriously concern me. Especially in regards to background checks. The government wants to build a database about people's mental health. This is a good thing how? You go to the doctor one day and he asks how you are doing and you say "Well Doc, to be honest, I've been kinda sad and low and depressed lately.". You're not suicidal, but the doctor, as is his duty under the proposed laws, reports that you said you were depressed. Next week, you go to buy a gun, because you think it would be a fun hobby to take up target shooting or skeet shooting. Suddenly, you are denied the ability to purchase a weapon. That is ok with you?

[falcondfw]

@Falcon- In fairness to you, this is where the first crack at 'valid by nationality' came in:-

This, you gave an 'Amen' to, for it's 'mind your own buisness' attitude I expect. But LDD isn't American himself, and if he wasn't pro-gun he'd most likely get the same treatment as Tenni for the amount of posting he does on the thread. Many of those postings are providing an agteement with Tenni, yet claims to be proof that he's wrong. So Tenni responds to clarify, as he so loves to do. It's annoying for ALL including Tenni I'm sure.

As for courtesy and respect for other countries laws etc, that's just another way of saying "Mind your own buisness!". That doesn't work on an international site! You could start a thread and state that it's just for Americans though. That would be fine, and interesting IMO.
But when somebody is slated for their opinions on an open thread and their country of origin is used to silence those opinions, it comes accros as xzenophobic. That maybe just a tint in an overdefensive attack on unwanted opinion? But is uncalled for never the less. Tenni doesn't have a grudge against America, and his opinions are not held by just non-Americans either. Your not under attack!

As for genocide by your government, doesn't that qualify as anti-American? Compare what you say about your government and safety in your society to a wife who feels her life is at risk by her husband. You'd either tell her to get out of the mentaly hostile home or ask if she has reason to fear him. Some might claim that's not respectfull of the sanctity of marrige. Would you care?
These things are being said by you, and like a typical abused wife/husband you protest if any find fault with the abuser. BUT you haven't actualy been abused, and that's what makes you seem to be so pointlessly ill speaking of your own country. It's bloody confusing!:tongue:

Of course the 2nd amendmant is antiquated as far as an 'uprising' is concerned. Your not in some 3rd world country where the government would come a shooting if they wanted to cull the populace. There are sadly far better economic ways to do that. You'd cough, get sweat on, you'd die, etc.:eek2:
The government would step in to 'help' with the crisis, and the survivors would be lambs. They are not dumb!

I'm kinda glad you don't own a firearm, and that you consider it a potential risk to your curious children. You didn't need one today, and most likely won't ever. That's something good to say about your country. Why don't we hear tales of safety instead of those foreboding ones?
(Forget the biological culling scenario before contemplating that!lol)

Gear,
First, I don't care what nationality people are, if they use common sense, they get an amen. Too few use it.

Second "Of course the second amendment is antiquated as far as an uprising is concerned.". Tell that to the people of China, especially around Tien amen square.

And yes, there are better ways the government could do it. That does not mean they would choose those ways.


I'm kinda glad you don't own a firearm, and that you consider it a potential risk to your children.

Well, mister, who the eff are you to say that? That pisses me off. I have not insulted you in anyway and I do not deserve that treatment. Anyone who has ever been around firearms or reads the newspaper in America has read the stories about 5 yr old Johnny picking up Daddy's gun and it accidentally going off and blowing a hole in his chest or a sibling or a friend.
I also said I know how to secure a firearm when kids are around. Just because I chose not to have one right now does not mean I won't change my mind tomorrow and it is none of your bloody business if I do.

[Long Duck Dong]

So that's cleared up the mystery of how you obtained a gun license? I'm 'sane' remember!:rolleyes:
I was also an infantry soldier who could strip n assemble a rifle quicker that you could count your blessings. That has sod all to do with anybodies opinion of the NZ police who issued YOU a license! Be very sure that I'd be amongst the first to question them if I were a neighbour of yours!



so you are a person that used to serve in the military...??? lol you have just proved how much of a hypocritical person you are..... cos you used to be the same type of person that you make me out to be... a person that is a risk to anybody around them cos you are in possession and control of a weapon that can be used to kill somebody....

I like people like you cos you look down your nose at me as if I am something that was backed out of a great danes bum...... and the whole time, you used to be the same type of person that you try and label me to be.....

even fran with her moments with incorrect statements and assumptions about me, was more honest about her own past, and struggles with mental illness, and thats why I stand beside her in support of her wish to see the change in the US fire arms laws.... and in a way, wish that there was not a need to have firearms for use in the fight for freedom, protection of a country etc......


.I would hope that you were amongst the first to question the NZ police over me having a firearm, cos the first thing that would be asked, is how the fuck would you know I have a gun, cos you would have never seen it, known its location, how to get to it or being shot by it, unless you were in my house illegally...... and the cops would be asking you those questions, not me, while you were in a hospital bed....

even DD had no idea where the gun was, when she stayed here and she slept in the same fucking bed, and DD is my own partner......

now before you do the whole song and dance about risk to others and endangerment.... remember, you were a infantry soldier that has a loaded gun that was capable of killing and I am assuming you were trained to kill.... so remember that before you point fingers at others about them being a risk to life and limb.......

[falcondfw]

A lot of opinions have been posted but not a lot of historical facts. I found the following interesting.

Between December 14, 2012 (Newtown) and January 18, 2013, 1019 people have been killed by gun homicide in the USA.

This would be recent history.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_new town_sandy_hook_shooting.html?wpisrc=most_viral

There is a map indicating the locations of the gun murders. It has a interactive component that when you put your cursor over the figure representing the dead in a chart, it shows their name,age and city location.

I found the number of gun homicides nearly shocking since there is so much sadness over mass homicides. Since this thread is about gun homicides/gun control, other methods that people die is not really relevant. Since it is near double my country's actual gun homicides for an entire year, it is particularly disturbing. I know the populations are different but I also know the per 100 000 are three times greater.

Dare I write that it almost seems anti-humane and definitely anti-human to use this tool to kill your own kind in such numbers. Now isn't that anti-American to continue to permit killing your own citizens on purpose!!!! Freedom to live ramble aside.

(brainstorming) Maybe all purchasers of guns should be required to write out a thousand times, I know that if I use this tool that I will kill and end the life of another human or living creature. Or at least put a message on the gun barrel, gun handle warning, this tool's purpose is to kill..sort of like warnings on cigarette packages. Or are some still arguing that smoking does not kill..sorta like the gun is a tool argument. ;)

"most people do not use tenni's own issues with brain damage against him" (personal attack rule 2 by a no gun control supporter) Wtf you're posting such shitty lies. I have no brain damage or cognitive impairment. I can usually articulately write and analyse far better than you sir.

Recent history.
And the two cities with the biggest bullseye on them are . . . Chicago, IL and NYC. The two cities with the strictest gun laws in the country. So what does that tell us? Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns.

[Gearbox]

Well, mister, who the eff are you to say that? That pisses me off. I have not insulted you in anyway and I do not deserve that treatment. Anyone who has ever been around firearms or reads the newspaper in America has read the stories about 5 yr old Johnny picking up Daddy's gun and it accidentally going off and blowing a hole in his chest or a sibling or a friend.
I also said I know how to secure a firearm when kids are around. Just because I chose not to have one right now does not mean I won't change my mind tomorrow and it is none of your bloody business if I do.
Another 'mind your buisness' attempt from you! Again I'll suggest that if you don't want people to comment or have an opinion on 'your buisness', country, kittens, try NOT posting it on an international site! Having a little bitchy tantrum AFTER you do so is not going to silence anybody!

And I do live without a firearm. For 2 main reasons. 1. I can't afford a handgun right now. 2. I have 3 kids who are very curious about everything. I know how to secure a firearm, but don't want to take a chance.
Yes it's up to YOU whether you want to take that chance or not! But don't BS that somebody commending you on your concerns for your childrens safety is an insult or ill treatment! You simply want to feel less guilt if you chose to take that chance!

Gear,
First, I don't care what nationality people are, if they use common sense, they get an amen. Too few use it.

Second "Of course the second amendment is antiquated as far as an uprising is concerned.". Tell that to the people of China, especially around Tien amen square.

And yes, there are better ways the government could do it. That does not mean they would choose those ways.
Lets say you are right and your government is likely to attack the populace in the future:-

1. You ALL have firearms. They use tanks, helicopters etc or biological means. Your fucked!
2. You have no firearms. They use firearms etc. Your fucked!
You'd need a 3rd amendment to include ALL military and biological resources for civilians to maintain the 2nd amendmant's claim of securing a 'free state'.
It's just silly IMO.

[falcondfw]

Another 'mind your buisness' attempt from you! Again I'll suggest that if you don't want people to comment or have an opinion on 'your buisness', country, kittens, try NOT posting it on an international site! Having a little bitchy tantrum AFTER you do so is not going to silence anybody!

Yes it's up to YOU whether you want to take that chance or not! But don't BS that somebody commending you on your concerns for your childrens safety is an insult or ill treatment! You simply want to feel less guilt if you chose to take that chance!

Lets say you are right and your government is likely to attack the populace in the future:-

1. You ALL have firearms. They use tanks, helicopters etc or biological means. Your fucked!
2. You have no firearms. They use firearms etc. Your fucked!
You'd need a 3rd amendment to include ALL military and biological resources for civilians to maintain the 2nd amendmant's claim of securing a 'free state'.
It's just silly IMO.

In regards to your first statement, if you were a neighbor and made that backhanded comment, I would break your nose. If you seriously want people to think that was actually a compliment, try not posting it after you have slammed me for 4 pages. If you are being serious and complimenting me, you could have done it in a much better way. Same for your second comment.

In regards to your 3rd comment, you are truly an idiot. Just because you think we are effed either way, does that mean we should give up? That is the difference between England and the US and why we won the revolutionary war and the war of 1812. You give up. We do not. Ever see the movie "Red Dawn"?

[Gearbox]

so you are a person that used to serve in the military...??? lol you have just proved how much of a hypocritical person you are..... cos you used to be the same type of person that you make me out to be... a person that is a risk to anybody around them cos you are in possession and control of a weapon that can be used to kill somebody....
I am a CIVILIAN like you. But I am no risk to anybody as I don't have a firearm. That's because I am not a soldier, not at war and can differentiate between the two.
BIG difference there!

I like people like you cos you look down your nose at me as if I am something that was backed out of a great danes bum...... and the whole time, you used to be the same type of person that you try and label me to be.....

even fran with her moments with incorrect statements and assumptions about me, was more honest about her own past, and struggles with mental illness, and thats why I stand beside her in support of her wish to see the change in the US fire arms laws.... and in a way, wish that there was not a need to have firearms for use in the fight for freedom, protection of a country etc......
You post dumb discriminating slurs against the mentaly ill, anti-gun supporters, Uk & Canadians. Don't pretend that your a victim yet again!
Your not Moses! Your not leading 'your people' to Canaan, or the nearest gun fair. Your using groups to satisfy your needs. That's what you did when you were claiming to be 'on the fence' about gun laws. When you saw that the majority are pro-gun, you changed your stance to pro-gun. Then became the most vocal advocate.
It's not rocket science!


.I would hope that you were amongst the first to question the NZ police over me having a firearm, cos the first thing that would be asked, is how the fuck would you know I have a gun, cos you would have never seen it, known its location, how to get to it or being shot by it, unless you were in my house illegally...... and the cops would be asking you those questions, not me, while you were in a hospital bed....

even DD had no idea where the gun was, when she stayed here and she slept in the same fucking bed, and DD is my own partner......

now before you do the whole song and dance about risk to others and endangerment.... remember, you were a infantry soldier that has a loaded gun that was capable of killing and I am assuming you were trained to kill.... so remember that before you point fingers at others about them being a risk to life and limb.......
You posted on here that you have a firearm. Granted, that could be false! A sensible neighbour could report their suspiscions to the police, and not have to break into your home themselves.

'Hunt the gun' fun with DD? Do both a favour, get responsible and secure your firearm in a safe place. That doesn't mean 'a good hiding place'!
I hope Falcon doesn't actualy mistake you for 'sensible'! BIG mistake!:eek2:
As a soldier, you are not just trained to kill people with firearms! A great deal of importance is put on firearm safety, to NOT to kill anybody unintentionaly.
You could (if legal) go and ask for help with that at your local police station. Soon as possible!

[Gearbox]

In regards to your first statement, if you were a neighbor and made that backhanded comment, I would break your nose. If you seriously want people to think that was actually a compliment, try not posting it after you have slammed me for 4 pages. If you are being serious and complimenting me, you could have done it in a much better way. Same for your second comment.

In regards to your 3rd comment, you are truly an idiot. Just because you think we are effed either way, does that mean we should give up? That is the difference between England and the US and why we won the revolutionary war and the war of 1812. You give up. We do not. Ever see the movie "Red Dawn"?
You'd seriously break a neighbours nose for complimenting you on your concerns for you kids safety? Utter bolox! You threw a hissy bitch fit due to wanting a gun in the future DESPITE you claiming that you wouldn't take a chance! Get real!
As for slamming you for 4 pages (if that was true) making you think that I'd not commend on for your concerns for your kids, THAT is just BS too!

I'm an idiot and you get your history lessons from films?
Wake up! It isn't 1812, your not talking of foreign invasion, muskets are not the latest technology and you will be well and truly fucked whether you give in or not if your government wants you dead!
That's NOT an anti-American remark btw! Just common sense.

[tenni]

If, in your own words, this number is not a representation of the people who possess guns in each country, then why even bring it up? It is not relevant to the discussion and only serves to further your bash America attitude.

I’m not quite sure what point you are trying to make? I don’t see a sentence in your quote where I state that the stats are not representative of the countries?


Gun possession/ownership is not the same as gun deaths per capita.


The US has the highest gun ownership in the world. The Swiss who are each (men) given a gun during the compulsory military service have half the number of gun ownerships compared to the US (88.8/100) That suggests that the majority of Swiss (54.5%) with 45.5 per 100 gun ownership get rid of guns after military service for men. The personal weapons of the militia are kept at home as part of the military obligations; Switzerland thus has one of the highest militia gun ownerships in the world. Militia gun ownership is different than civilian gun ownership or the total population gun ownership.


Basically, the sale of automatic firearms, selective fire weapons and certain accessories such as sound suppressors(silencers) is forbidden in Switzerland.


The Swiss have stricter gun control laws than the US. Swiss gun laws are considered to be restrictive. Owners are legally responsible for third party access and usage of their weapons. In Switzerland, there is complicated record making if a person sells their gun and the seller must keep the record for ten years.


The Swiss have half per capita the numbers of gun related deaths compared to the US.

btw Falcon...The US lost the War of 1812 in North America. You were kicked out of Upper Canada after invading it. It was the US first defeat. Yet the US claimed never to have been defeated for years..The US was just playing pretendsies I guess. ;) This is not an anti American statement. It is historical fact.

[Long Duck Dong]

I am a CIVILIAN like you. But I am no risk to anybody as I don't have a firearm. That's because I am not a soldier, not at war and can differentiate between the two.
BIG difference there!

You post dumb discriminating slurs against the mentaly ill, anti-gun supporters, Uk & Canadians. Don't pretend that your a victim yet again!
Your not Moses! Your not leading 'your people' to Canaan, or the nearest gun fair. Your using groups to satisfy your needs. That's what you did when you were claiming to be 'on the fence' about gun laws. When you saw that the majority are pro-gun, you changed your stance to pro-gun. Then became the most vocal advocate.
It's not rocket science!


You posted on here that you have a firearm. Granted, that could be false! A sensible neighbour could report their suspiscions to the police, and not have to break into your home themselves.

'Hunt the gun' fun with DD? Do both a favour, get responsible and secure your firearm in a safe place. That doesn't mean 'a good hiding place'!
I hope Falcon doesn't actualy mistake you for 'sensible'! BIG mistake!:eek2:
As a soldier, you are not just trained to kill people with firearms! A great deal of importance is put on firearm safety, to NOT to kill anybody unintentionaly.
You could (if legal) go and ask for help with that at your local police station. Soon as possible!


stay in the UK please, for your own safety and without ya guns... cos you can be safe in the knowledge that NZ and the US will save ya asses once again, like we did in ww1 and ww 2 with our guns and bombs and tanks and planes..... and if you wet your pants cos a big scary man with a gun says boo, we promise not to laugh.... too much.....

[Long Duck Dong]

I’m not quite sure what point you are trying to make? I don’t see a sentence in your quote where I state that the stats are not representative of the countries?


Gun possession/ownership is not the same as gun deaths per capita.


The US has the highest gun ownership in the world. The Swiss who are each (men) given a gun during the compulsory military service have half the number of gun ownerships compared to the US (88.8/100) That suggests that the majority of Swiss (54.5%) with 45.5 per 100 gun ownership get rid of guns after military service for men. The personal weapons of the militia are kept at home as part of the military obligations; Switzerland thus has one of the highest militia gun ownerships in the world. Militia gun ownership is different than civilian gun ownership or the total population gun ownership.


Basically, the sale of automatic firearms, selective fire weapons and certain accessories such as sound suppressors(silencers) is forbidden in Switzerland.


The Swiss have stricter gun control laws than the US. Swiss gun laws are considered to be restrictive. Owners are legally responsible for third party access and usage of their weapons. In Switzerland, there is complicated record making if a person sells their gun and the seller must keep the record for ten years.


The Swiss have half per capita the numbers of gun related deaths compared to the US.



from post 28 where I first posted the stats......

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/switzerland

the swiss have 8 mill population, 3.8 mill guns estimated, the homicide rate non gun (53 ) is near equal to the homicide with a gun rate ( 50 approx ).... their non gun suicide rate ( 1313 ) is 5x the suicide by gun rate ( 239 )..... switzerland has very loose gun control laws, and a military service policy.....

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
the US has 313 mill people, 270 mill guns in private ownership ( estimated ) the homicide rate non gun ( 14,159 ) is just under 1.5x higher than the homicide rate by gun ( 9,146 ) a non gun suicide rate ( 32,559 ) that is near 2 x the gun suicide rate ( 17,002 ) the us has multi state ownership laws that vary and no military service policy

[Brian]

This thread is getting out of hand and way too personal. I am closing it to cool things down and remind everyone to not attack each other on a personal level.

- Drew :paw: