Right to bear arms (Split Duh!)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Checkboard
A question for you. Are these statistics the only differences between the US and the UK? In otherwords, are our two societies alike in all other respects?
Is your use of the phrase "gun nuts" indicative of a preconceived bias or just a turn of a phrase for creative purposes?
A question for you. Are these statistics the only differences between the US and the UK? In otherwords, are our two societies alike in all other respects?
Is your use of the phrase "gun nuts" indicative of a preconceived bias or just a turn of a phrase for creative purposes?
Lies, damn lies and statistics - but these stats are pretty relevant.
The use of "gun nuts" indicates a pre-concieved opinion on my part (something required to take part in a discussion, I always thought. Discussions with people without opinions are called variously "lessons" or "indoctrinations"
)
The use of "gun nuts" indicates a pre-concieved opinion on my part (something required to take part in a discussion, I always thought. Discussions with people without opinions are called variously "lessons" or "indoctrinations"
)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T Richard
Hi mate, as slick as a politician.
Ignore the evidance, don't answer the question and change the subject by going on the offensive.
I'm not against guns for sport, but to want to carry one around with you is asking for trouble.
One day adreniline and emotion leads to the wrong decision, then its too late.
But hey thats my humble opinion.
Hi mate, as slick as a politician.
Ignore the evidance, don't answer the question and change the subject by going on the offensive.
I'm not against guns for sport, but to want to carry one around with you is asking for trouble.
One day adreniline and emotion leads to the wrong decision, then its too late.
But hey thats my humble opinion.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T-Richard
As you can guess I'm not anti-gun but it was more the way the second amendment is used by the gun lobby that concerns me.
I realise that there are checks in the US and that each state has varying degrees of control.
I suppose the use of the word 'mad' in reference to concealed weapons wasn't the best choice, but you have to carry them (guns) around, they weigh a lot, they wreck your suits, you're terrified of losing them, you can't take your jacket off etc.
I'd modify that to say you'd have to be daft to want one if it wasn't strictly part of your own personal security.
I've been in a bar in the sumer time with one female carrying a handbag with six revolvers because the blokes didn't want to wear their jackets. They'd prefer not to carry. Different culture.
As you can guess I'm not anti-gun but it was more the way the second amendment is used by the gun lobby that concerns me.
I realise that there are checks in the US and that each state has varying degrees of control.
I suppose the use of the word 'mad' in reference to concealed weapons wasn't the best choice, but you have to carry them (guns) around, they weigh a lot, they wreck your suits, you're terrified of losing them, you can't take your jacket off etc.
I'd modify that to say you'd have to be daft to want one if it wasn't strictly part of your own personal security.
I've been in a bar in the sumer time with one female carrying a handbag with six revolvers because the blokes didn't want to wear their jackets. They'd prefer not to carry. Different culture.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Morning FireAxe
Now, now calling me "as slick as a politician" is a very low blow, don't you think.
You are not wrong about the risks inherent in carrying a gun, I actually know of a guy walking through a restaurant here on the east coast who's pistol fell out of his waistband purely by accident. The poor offduty policeman was filling out paperwork for a week. A gun is like any other tool, you have to use it responsibly or you should lose the right to use it. I don't know anything about the UK's drunk driving limits, but I have seen a drastic change in the US as to what is considered drunk driving for legal purposes over the last 20 years. The biggest changes occured when the police started to enforce the law instead of letting the marginal drunks go with a warning.
Fireax There is also a cultural aspect to this argument. That is what I was alluding to when I asked Checkerboard ...." Are these statistics the only differences between the US and the UK? In otherwords, are our two societies alike in all other respects?"
This country was built by individual pioneers going into the unknown with only their trusty six shooter. When we ceded from King George, you guys had been living in urban communities for how long? BTW I don't expect to change the mind of anyone east of the pond, the mindset is too different.
MJ
How did you access unpublished FBI data? Are you a mole in our agency?
Just kidding. Quoting Warren Burger to a gun advocate is not what would be called a reasoned argument, A liberals liberal, that one.
Foss
Anyone other than an off duty cop is probably breaking the law if they are carrying a concealed gun in a bar. Each state is different but,I'd guess I may be right on that one.
Now, now calling me "as slick as a politician" is a very low blow, don't you think.
You are not wrong about the risks inherent in carrying a gun, I actually know of a guy walking through a restaurant here on the east coast who's pistol fell out of his waistband purely by accident. The poor offduty policeman was filling out paperwork for a week. A gun is like any other tool, you have to use it responsibly or you should lose the right to use it. I don't know anything about the UK's drunk driving limits, but I have seen a drastic change in the US as to what is considered drunk driving for legal purposes over the last 20 years. The biggest changes occured when the police started to enforce the law instead of letting the marginal drunks go with a warning.
Fireax There is also a cultural aspect to this argument. That is what I was alluding to when I asked Checkerboard ...." Are these statistics the only differences between the US and the UK? In otherwords, are our two societies alike in all other respects?"
This country was built by individual pioneers going into the unknown with only their trusty six shooter. When we ceded from King George, you guys had been living in urban communities for how long? BTW I don't expect to change the mind of anyone east of the pond, the mindset is too different.
MJ
How did you access unpublished FBI data? Are you a mole in our agency?
Just kidding. Quoting Warren Burger to a gun advocate is not what would be called a reasoned argument, A liberals liberal, that one.Foss
Anyone other than an off duty cop is probably breaking the law if they are carrying a concealed gun in a bar. Each state is different but,I'd guess I may be right on that one.
Actually, if you looked at my "from" line - I am an Australian.
Aussies were walking into the bush, trusty firearm in hand and slaughtering their natives when Americans were sitting comfortably in established cities (on the east coast, at least). Handguns (and firearms in general) were banned in Australia before the UK! I don't think your argument holds much water.
Apart from a history involving a gun saturated culture, the major difference (between Australia and the US at least) on this issue is that (at least in Australia) voting is compulsory.
You see, the old quote "Opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one" ("and they all stink / but no-one wants to look at yours" etc etc
) simply isn't true. The sad fact is that many people are too apathetic to form opinions about most issues - and this is demonstrated in countries with "voluntary voting" like the US, where only 54% (year 2000 elections) or so of eligable adults can be bothered to stop off at a poll booth on the way home from the shops. The argument goes like this:
Presidential advisor: Last year over 15,000 Americans were shot dead.
President: That's shocking - what do the people think? (Hey, he is a polititian after all )
Presidential advisor: 70% are dead set against personal ownership of handguns.
President: But isn't it all too hard - how could we go about it?
Presidential advisor: As they have in other countries, you would have to offer government cash to buy back guns that are out there at the moment, and to compensate businesses that sell guns now. It isn't impossible, and the effects in reducing gun deaths would be immediate - although it would take a generation or so to achieve the safe levels enjoyed overseas.
President: A generation! I have a FOUR year term! I can't think on those scales! And the money!
Presidential advisor: Well ... we were prepared to spend around seven billion dollars disarming foreign countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Anything like that sort of money would save more American lives than were lost in the World Trade centre, especially as the World Trade attacks (although tragic) were "one-offs" and not ongoing yearly death tolls.
President: So it is possible, good with the people, cost effective ....
Presidential advisor: yep.
President: My God! Quick! Draft a Bill for congress banning guns!
Presidential advisor: Wait! Of those 70% of eligible voters, most are housewives and such that can't be bothered voting, but of the 30% that like guns, organisations like the NRA have them in a voting frenzy - they ALL vote on this issue.
President: So if I manage to pass a law banning guns I will please 70% of the US adults of voting age, and begin to save over 15,000 American lives each year.
Presidential advisor: yep.
President: but I will be voted out of office.
Presidential advisor: you and all the congressmen that attempt to support you (so you couldn't get the law passed anyway) - by a 60-40 majority our research shows.
President: Quick! Tear up that bill!
Presidential advisor: OK
President: And burn the paper - we never even considered this move, OK?
Aussies were walking into the bush, trusty firearm in hand and slaughtering their natives when Americans were sitting comfortably in established cities (on the east coast, at least). Handguns (and firearms in general) were banned in Australia before the UK! I don't think your argument holds much water.
Apart from a history involving a gun saturated culture, the major difference (between Australia and the US at least) on this issue is that (at least in Australia) voting is compulsory.
You see, the old quote "Opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one" ("and they all stink / but no-one wants to look at yours" etc etc
) simply isn't true. The sad fact is that many people are too apathetic to form opinions about most issues - and this is demonstrated in countries with "voluntary voting" like the US, where only 54% (year 2000 elections) or so of eligable adults can be bothered to stop off at a poll booth on the way home from the shops. The argument goes like this:Presidential advisor: Last year over 15,000 Americans were shot dead.
President: That's shocking - what do the people think? (Hey, he is a polititian after all
)Presidential advisor: 70% are dead set against personal ownership of handguns.
President: But isn't it all too hard - how could we go about it?
Presidential advisor: As they have in other countries, you would have to offer government cash to buy back guns that are out there at the moment, and to compensate businesses that sell guns now. It isn't impossible, and the effects in reducing gun deaths would be immediate - although it would take a generation or so to achieve the safe levels enjoyed overseas.
President: A generation! I have a FOUR year term! I can't think on those scales! And the money!
Presidential advisor: Well ... we were prepared to spend around seven billion dollars disarming foreign countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Anything like that sort of money would save more American lives than were lost in the World Trade centre, especially as the World Trade attacks (although tragic) were "one-offs" and not ongoing yearly death tolls.
President: So it is possible, good with the people, cost effective ....
Presidential advisor: yep.
President: My God! Quick! Draft a Bill for congress banning guns!
Presidential advisor: Wait! Of those 70% of eligible voters, most are housewives and such that can't be bothered voting, but of the 30% that like guns, organisations like the NRA have them in a voting frenzy - they ALL vote on this issue.
President: So if I manage to pass a law banning guns I will please 70% of the US adults of voting age, and begin to save over 15,000 American lives each year.
Presidential advisor: yep.
President: but I will be voted out of office.
Presidential advisor: you and all the congressmen that attempt to support you (so you couldn't get the law passed anyway) - by a 60-40 majority our research shows.
President: Quick! Tear up that bill!
Presidential advisor: OK
President: And burn the paper - we never even considered this move, OK?
Last edited by Checkboard; 10th Apr 2003 at 23:15.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Morning Checkerboard
Sorry I missed your point of origin, (actually I was confused by your accent just kidding
I didn't know that voting in Australia is compulsory, what a wonderful idea, seriously. Our low voter turnouts drive me crazy.
I appreciate your interpretation of American political theatre, I am not sure that it has any relevance to reality, it might, but I am not sure it does. I suspect that you can't be any more sure sitting half way around the world.
The simple fact is that something like 80% of Americans own at least one gun and we are not about to surrender them. Someone in this post derided the five years it took to get the Brady bill into place, well in a free society, abridging any right no matter how small the abridgement is taken very seriously. The facts are that there are laws on the books today that if enforced would have prevented events like the Columbine shootings, its sad but true.
There are alot of reasons why young black men die in such large numbers in our country, availability of illegal guns is one of them, but there are others that contribute as much to the problem if not more. My contention is that before you abridge my legal right to own a firearm, make sure you have solved all the other equally significant problems.
Sorry I missed your point of origin, (actually I was confused by your accent
just kiddingI didn't know that voting in Australia is compulsory, what a wonderful idea, seriously. Our low voter turnouts drive me crazy.
I appreciate your interpretation of American political theatre, I am not sure that it has any relevance to reality, it might, but I am not sure it does. I suspect that you can't be any more sure sitting half way around the world.
The simple fact is that something like 80% of Americans own at least one gun and we are not about to surrender them. Someone in this post derided the five years it took to get the Brady bill into place, well in a free society, abridging any right no matter how small the abridgement is taken very seriously. The facts are that there are laws on the books today that if enforced would have prevented events like the Columbine shootings, its sad but true.
There are alot of reasons why young black men die in such large numbers in our country, availability of illegal guns is one of them, but there are others that contribute as much to the problem if not more. My contention is that before you abridge my legal right to own a firearm, make sure you have solved all the other equally significant problems.
Having these discussions over the 'net os so refreshing! You can so easily find the facts to tear down "urban legend" (polite term for outright lies ) stats quoted to support opposing arguments:
from Reason On-line
"According to widely varying estimates, there are between 77 million and 90 million gun owners in the United States.
39 Percentage of Americans report a gun in their home."
.. A lot closer to my guess of 30% than yours of 80% !
) stats quoted to support opposing arguments:from Reason On-line
"According to widely varying estimates, there are between 77 million and 90 million gun owners in the United States.
39 Percentage of Americans report a gun in their home."
.. A lot closer to my guess of 30% than yours of 80% !
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Checkboard
You are more likely to get a reasoned response from e if you are not so quick to call me a liar. There is a significant problem with your data, good luck figuring it out.
Peace
You are more likely to get a reasoned response from e if you are not so quick to call me a liar. There is a significant problem with your data, good luck figuring it out.
Peace
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mk. 1 desk at present...
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Checkboard:
And then...
OK, fair enough... but you don't give the UK stats.... what is happening to the UK figures for gunshot wounds treated?
What you say is:
You're quoting two completely different sets of stats, intermixed with opinion... quote real US vs. UK stats, or none at all!
Then, in response to a point about crime being lower in states which allow citizens to carry, you quote statistics for three states on percentage of homicides committed with a gun... well ok, but where are the crime statistics...?
Disengenuous, Sir.
R1
The number of gunshot wounds from assaults treated in hospital emergency departments fell from 64,100 in 1993 to 39,400 in 1997, a 39% decline.
Compare this with the UK stats:
What you say is:
Guns were used in only 4.7% of robberies in 1999 and 4.4% in 1998 so the crime problem is to a very large extent one of non-firearms crime. The UK's tight gun laws are undoubtedly responsible for the relatively rare use of guns in crime
Then, in response to a point about crime being lower in states which allow citizens to carry, you quote statistics for three states on percentage of homicides committed with a gun... well ok, but where are the crime statistics...?
Disengenuous, Sir.
R1
T_richard, my apologies ! I actually wasn't referring to you in particular, but the pro-gun lobby in history, although I know my post didn't read that way at all. One of the problems with 'net communication is that you can't read my mind (as I can't read yours) and things that appear obvious to my reading are not so to others - this is totally myfault and I had no intention of accusing you personnally of telling lies, I am sorry.
I was wondering if anyone would pick up the difference in the stat figures They are taken from different sites, on a quick Google search. Having said that the differences in the figures are so obviously large that I though direct comparisons (which would require more work than I am prepared to give) would be superfluous.
The premise is simple:
I was wondering if anyone would pick up the difference in the stat figures
They are taken from different sites, on a quick Google search. Having said that the differences in the figures are so obviously large that I though direct comparisons (which would require more work than I am prepared to give) would be superfluous. The premise is simple:
- the fewer guns in a community, the safer that community is from gun crime.
- gun crime is inherently the most dangerous form of violent crime, it is the very power of guns that provides their attraction to many.
Last edited by Checkboard; 11th Apr 2003 at 00:54.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CB apology accepted, nicely phrased by the way.
In America the single most attractive form of power to a young man under 25 y/o is an automobile. The single largest killer of young adults in this country is (I believe) NOTE DISCLAIMER, the automobile. I point this out not because it is some new breakthrough statistic, but to highlight what I believe is a cultural bias. Let me explain, my Dutch brother-in-law, educated in England, living in America, goes on a rant about the danger of guns to children (<25 y/o) in America. He says this as his two teenage daughters climb into their 4WD midsize SUV (inherently unstable mind you) for a night on the town. He cannot name anyone of his childrens peers killed by a gun, he knows of many of them hurt, killed or arrested for failure to operate a auto safely, but the gun is more dangerous in his mind.
CB, I still don't know if my 80% number is wrong, the stats you cited came from a poll of <2000 Americans in a land of 285 million people or 0.0007%. STOP I took stats in college too. The reason I don't trust your number is that the sample size is too small to overcome the following problem which is that if a pollster calls me at home and says "do you own a firearm?", As a gunowner, I am not going to be inclined to answer that question honestly, there is no benefit to me to do so, and some real or perceived risk. Also did the polling occur in a major metropolitan area, or the farm country of Iowa? even worse, did they restrict the polling to the New England states, or did they call the Southwest too. These two population groups are not even close to homgeneous in their basic makeup.
There is no question that too many people die by gunfire because even on death especially if it is someone you know and love is too many. The question is always "What do we do about it?
In America the single most attractive form of power to a young man under 25 y/o is an automobile. The single largest killer of young adults in this country is (I believe) NOTE DISCLAIMER, the automobile. I point this out not because it is some new breakthrough statistic, but to highlight what I believe is a cultural bias. Let me explain, my Dutch brother-in-law, educated in England, living in America, goes on a rant about the danger of guns to children (<25 y/o) in America. He says this as his two teenage daughters climb into their 4WD midsize SUV (inherently unstable mind you) for a night on the town. He cannot name anyone of his childrens peers killed by a gun, he knows of many of them hurt, killed or arrested for failure to operate a auto safely, but the gun is more dangerous in his mind.
CB, I still don't know if my 80% number is wrong, the stats you cited came from a poll of <2000 Americans in a land of 285 million people or 0.0007%. STOP I took stats in college too. The reason I don't trust your number is that the sample size is too small to overcome the following problem which is that if a pollster calls me at home and says "do you own a firearm?", As a gunowner, I am not going to be inclined to answer that question honestly, there is no benefit to me to do so, and some real or perceived risk. Also did the polling occur in a major metropolitan area, or the farm country of Iowa? even worse, did they restrict the polling to the New England states, or did they call the Southwest too. These two population groups are not even close to homgeneous in their basic makeup.
There is no question that too many people die by gunfire because even on death especially if it is someone you know and love is too many. The question is always "What do we do about it?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
I was not trying to compare DUI deaths with gun deaths. Read the post again please. I was trying to make a point about the cultural differences that contribute to the debate that occurs in places like this site My brother in law sees one thing even though he experiances something completely different. My American brother in law raised in an environment where guns are used and respected sees the same teenagers as being more at risk in a car than with a gun. I don't have the time to analyse your statistics( I am at work, its midday here). I will just say that A I don't see anyone calling you an "Anti-gun nut" in this thread and B: American gunowners do not understand how British or Aussies gave up their guns. We do not see across the board confiscation as the reasonable solution to the problem. We do recognize there is a problem we just disagree on the solution
I was not trying to compare DUI deaths with gun deaths. Read the post again please. I was trying to make a point about the cultural differences that contribute to the debate that occurs in places like this site My brother in law sees one thing even though he experiances something completely different. My American brother in law raised in an environment where guns are used and respected sees the same teenagers as being more at risk in a car than with a gun. I don't have the time to analyse your statistics( I am at work, its midday here). I will just say that A I don't see anyone calling you an "Anti-gun nut" in this thread and B: American gunowners do not understand how British or Aussies gave up their guns. We do not see across the board confiscation as the reasonable solution to the problem. We do recognize there is a problem we just disagree on the solution
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
OMG now youy want to debate DUI AND gun control! I don't think I have the time to do all that.
As far as the career of a US senator, this land of gun slinging, gas guzzling red necks is not as knee jerk as some might guess. If I told you 10 years ago that in 10 years there would be a ban on cigarrette (sp) smoking in all restaurants and bars in NYC except for those that could meet expensive guidelines, I'd bet that we'd have to pick you up off the floor after your laughing fit. Well, been to NYC lately? Yes I know about the grace period, but I hope you get the point.
Since that post, how many Iraiqs didn't die at the hands of SH?
On a personal note: who were you shooting at in Wichita, KS?
Did you hit the target, are you with the SAS? Did the FBI pick you up for questioning? OMG RU a terrorist?
Sorry just a little bit of levity after a very long day, well, I'll pick this up tomorrow, if the markets don't crumble. Be safe
OMG now youy want to debate DUI AND gun control! I don't think I have the time to do all that.
As far as the career of a US senator, this land of gun slinging, gas guzzling red necks is not as knee jerk as some might guess. If I told you 10 years ago that in 10 years there would be a ban on cigarrette (sp) smoking in all restaurants and bars in NYC except for those that could meet expensive guidelines, I'd bet that we'd have to pick you up off the floor after your laughing fit. Well, been to NYC lately? Yes I know about the grace period, but I hope you get the point.
Since that post, how many Iraiqs didn't die at the hands of SH?
On a personal note: who were you shooting at in Wichita, KS?
Did you hit the target, are you with the SAS? Did the FBI pick you up for questioning? OMG RU a terrorist?
Sorry just a little bit of levity after a very long day, well, I'll pick this up tomorrow, if the markets don't crumble. Be safe
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mk. 1 desk at present...
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike,
You make much of the "66% homicides by gun in USA vs. 8.5% in UK" (2000 figures?), and how this requires 'only a few seconds analysis'...
Yes again, someone is being disingenuous and quoting misleading statistics.
The USA is, to a fairly large degree, an armed society. Most homicides in any society are 'crimes of passion' commited by members of the victims own family or friends, I believe (but stand to be corrected). OF COURSE a much higher percentage of homicides are going to be by gun in the USA, simply because the guns are available, and thus become the weapon of choice.
A more relevant statistic would be the murder rate per capita, where I believe the UK and US rates are fairly close, and converging - the 66% vs. 8.5% figure is totally spurious - the important figure for any individual is how likely you are to BE murdered, NOT what you're likely to be murdered WITH!
R1
You make much of the "66% homicides by gun in USA vs. 8.5% in UK" (2000 figures?), and how this requires 'only a few seconds analysis'...
Yes again, someone is being disingenuous and quoting misleading statistics.
The USA is, to a fairly large degree, an armed society. Most homicides in any society are 'crimes of passion' commited by members of the victims own family or friends, I believe (but stand to be corrected). OF COURSE a much higher percentage of homicides are going to be by gun in the USA, simply because the guns are available, and thus become the weapon of choice.
A more relevant statistic would be the murder rate per capita, where I believe the UK and US rates are fairly close, and converging - the 66% vs. 8.5% figure is totally spurious - the important figure for any individual is how likely you are to BE murdered, NOT what you're likely to be murdered WITH!
R1
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Redhill
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a recent flight I took, one of the film channels was showing a documentary by American film maker Michael Moore, called "Bowling for Colombine".
It is a look in-to the American gun culture.
One bit that for me, summed up the American attitude to owning a gun, was that a couple of weeks after the shooting in Colombine (when 2 students shot up their school, then killed themselves) the National Rifle Association held a meeting in the same town. Their chairman is Charlton Heston, who when asked why the meeting was held so soon after the shooting replied "it's our right"
One year later, when a 6 year old boy took a pistol to school, and killed a 6 year old girl, in a different town, the NRA held another meeting in the town to promote firearms.
The viedo is due to be released later this month, and is tipped for an OSCAR. If anyone has a spare couple of hours, it's well worth a watch.
It is a look in-to the American gun culture.
One bit that for me, summed up the American attitude to owning a gun, was that a couple of weeks after the shooting in Colombine (when 2 students shot up their school, then killed themselves) the National Rifle Association held a meeting in the same town. Their chairman is Charlton Heston, who when asked why the meeting was held so soon after the shooting replied "it's our right"
One year later, when a 6 year old boy took a pistol to school, and killed a 6 year old girl, in a different town, the NRA held another meeting in the town to promote firearms.
The viedo is due to be released later this month, and is tipped for an OSCAR. If anyone has a spare couple of hours, it's well worth a watch.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mk. 1 desk at present...
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike,
You cited someone elses quote:
The maths is indeed defective: the official figure is that the US has 3.5 times more murders per head than the UK. The US figure has been declining steadily for some time, the UK figure rising.
However, the official figures don't show the true picture: the actual numbers are much closer, as US murder figures count any crime that results in a dead body, whether murder, manslaughter, unlawful killing, or any other crime. UK figures only reflect murder convictions.
American murder rates are more about culture than guns; I've read that a study showed New York had a murder rate consistantly about 5 times that of London over the last two hundred years, despite the fact that serious gun control didn't start in the UK (or New York) until after WWI (I believe).
A far more important factor, it has to be said, in US murder is skin colour. 13% of the US population are black. 50% of murderers are black. 50% of victims are black.
You also ignore the protective effect of an armed population - in the UK, 53% of burglaries occur when the victim is in the house. In the US, it's 13%. The reason? American burglars are more afraid of armed householders than anything else.
If in doubt, ask the people who have to deal with the consequences... surveyed at a recent national conference, 93% of American police chiefs said law-abiding citizens should be allowed to own guns. 62% said that allowing citizens to carry concealed guns helped to reduce crime.
You might find this interesting reading...
http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1F032CF2
R1
You cited someone elses quote:
Now my maths may not be the best, but the US has five times the population yet two hundred and fifty-odd times more murders!
However, the official figures don't show the true picture: the actual numbers are much closer, as US murder figures count any crime that results in a dead body, whether murder, manslaughter, unlawful killing, or any other crime. UK figures only reflect murder convictions.
American murder rates are more about culture than guns; I've read that a study showed New York had a murder rate consistantly about 5 times that of London over the last two hundred years, despite the fact that serious gun control didn't start in the UK (or New York) until after WWI (I believe).
A far more important factor, it has to be said, in US murder is skin colour. 13% of the US population are black. 50% of murderers are black. 50% of victims are black.
You also ignore the protective effect of an armed population - in the UK, 53% of burglaries occur when the victim is in the house. In the US, it's 13%. The reason? American burglars are more afraid of armed householders than anything else.
If in doubt, ask the people who have to deal with the consequences... surveyed at a recent national conference, 93% of American police chiefs said law-abiding citizens should be allowed to own guns. 62% said that allowing citizens to carry concealed guns helped to reduce crime.
You might find this interesting reading...
http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1F032CF2
R1
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pinkie
Please don't site M. Moore in your analysis of guns in America unless you are prepared to site some racisit film producer I am not aware of re: Blacks in America. Moore has an AX to grind, the NRA meeting in CO was scheduled well in advance of the tragedy at Columbine HS. The go/nogo decision had as much to do with public attacks as it had to do with public sensitivity. They did their best to lower their exposure out of respect for the children who died at Columbine. Please do not insult my country by taking the cheap shot that leads anyone to believe that any American citizen regardless of their views on guns was anything but horrified by the killings in our schools. I am a gun owner an content with that position, but I am also a parent and I feel for those parents, furthemore no one who threatens any child in my country is safe near me.
99% of NRA members were shocked and saddened by the events at Columbine HS. But Moore is a sensationalistic film maker who seeks personal gain by stirring the national political pot. If you give him credibility, then you may certainly believe that Sean Penn is the US authority on Middle East politics.
In other words shut the F**k up
Please don't site M. Moore in your analysis of guns in America unless you are prepared to site some racisit film producer I am not aware of re: Blacks in America. Moore has an AX to grind, the NRA meeting in CO was scheduled well in advance of the tragedy at Columbine HS. The go/nogo decision had as much to do with public attacks as it had to do with public sensitivity. They did their best to lower their exposure out of respect for the children who died at Columbine. Please do not insult my country by taking the cheap shot that leads anyone to believe that any American citizen regardless of their views on guns was anything but horrified by the killings in our schools. I am a gun owner an content with that position, but I am also a parent and I feel for those parents, furthemore no one who threatens any child in my country is safe near me.
99% of NRA members were shocked and saddened by the events at Columbine HS. But Moore is a sensationalistic film maker who seeks personal gain by stirring the national political pot. If you give him credibility, then you may certainly believe that Sean Penn is the US authority on Middle East politics.
In other words shut the F**k up
Pinkie,
I'd suggest reading this essay before heaping too much credit on 'Bowling for Columbine'.
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
I'd suggest reading this essay before heaping too much credit on 'Bowling for Columbine'.
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html