Guns, ammunition, rednecks, liberals, Gun Fabricators, and the Constitution

[aurik]

So now the argument is that the second amendment is there to protect us from an overly litigious society.


I totally earn bonus points for using "litigious".

[#686578]

So now the argument is that the second amendment is there to protect us from an overly litigious society.


I totally earn bonus points for using "litigious".

no, I was rebutting the less than lethal decision.

[#686578]

no, I was rebutting the less than lethal decision.

Points awarded for using rebutting.

It's like butts, but again.

[Grievear]

So now the argument is that the second amendment is there to protect us from an overly litigious society.


I totally earn bonus points for using "litigious".

Not to mention extra bonus for being both childish and loquacious on the same page!

I agree with you on the stupidity of the law situation in Florida, but for the opposite reason. I think it's absolutely absurd that there is the legal precedence that would allow a criminal, injured in my home, while committing a felony, to pursue legal recourse against me.

Honestly I would much rather shoot to wound, I don't think it's fair to kill someone for stealing. That's not enough for me to risk my family's financial well being and my personal future to save their scumbag life.

[#686578]

Honestly I would much rather shoot to wound, I don't think it's fair to kill someone for stealing. That's not enough for me to risk my family's financial well being and my personal future to save their scumbag life.

Say that in the LM-17 thread.

[Grievear]

Say that in the LM-17 thread.

Heh, it's been so long since I've played that I had to go Google LM-17 to understand your joke.

/derail

[Melchiah]

Heh, it's been so long since I've played that I had to go Google LM-17 to understand your joke.

/derail

Then with a post count like yours why the fuck are you here?

[Grievear]

Then with a post count like yours why the fuck are you here?

Not everyone has to be a post-mongering attention-whore. I'd look at the joined date.

[#686578]

argument is going well now.

[Melchiah]

Not everyone has to be a post-mongering attention-whore. I'd look at the joined date.

By your own admission you haven't played FFXI in such time, or apparently haven't seen a thread in advanced in the past... 2 years that you didn't know what LM-17 meant. So I reiterate, why are you shitting up threads on a forum related to a game you don't play?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Hey Finesse, how much illegal cocaine flows in the streets of America? And how much of that cocaine originates here? AFAIK, the coca plant is pretty much exclusive to South America, and yet it manages to find it's way into our homes on this side of the border. That pretty much shoots holes in your idiotic argument above.

Yeah, gun smugglers melt down guns to liquid form and cut them into substances like gasoline or juice, bring them into the US en masse, then unliquify them to bring people illegal guns.

They also have people put guns in condoms, swallow them, and come here legally. Yeah, it's great, they shit the gun condom and now illegal guns are here.

RETARDED EXAMPLE IS RETARDED.

The bottom line is it is, and will be ( as experienced by countries that have very strict guns laws as I have provided information for ) extremely hard to smuggle guns into this country in a manner that would be consistent for any citizen to need semi-automatic or automatic weapons.

The better the drugs, the higher the price. Same goes for guns. Some petty burglar or asshole that wants to rob a liquor store won't get his hands on something worthwhile if we had strict gun control.


SORRY, DIDN'T MEAN TO SHOOT A HOLE IN YOUR IDIOTIC ANALOGY.

NO PUN INTENDED.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Last time I checked. Korea no longer exists. When it did exist, it was very violent. Had you said South Korea, I would have ignored that post like the rest of your moronic dribble. There is a difference between Korea, North Korea and South Korea...

Now who feels embarrassed?

You're still an idiot. My wife is Korean, Koreans call what we call South Korea - OMGOSH - Korea. Korea calls itself "The Republic of Korea." How about you learn yourself some geography instead of looking like an idiot debating dumb shit not related anything to what anyone said in any form of context.

North Korea is considered a rogue state, and no one that says Korea means anything but South Korea. South Korea is a westernized phrase because of the DMZ.

You're welcome for your Social Studies lesson, dipshit.

Also, call the police on this bullpoopoo ---> http://www.korea.net/

South Korea aka the Republic of Korea called their own country's website korea.net.
Go send them a nasty email that nobody will know what they mean! There are 3 Koreas this is going to make white people do the stanky leg

[Beckwin]

yeah lol, South Koreans just call their country Korea. Hanguk. that's it.

murder rates and number of guns follow a pretty close correlation- look at any number of graphs that I've probably posted in the past.

if you're gonna have a state (particularly capitalist) society with a hierarchy of force related to money, the second amendment (as interpreted by NRA nutjobs) is fucking stupid and should be repealed. you can't argue about absolutes of human nature and firearms, but you can analyze how humans react to structures in society and it's painfully fucking obvious how people react when they have guns in the kinds of societies we live in currently. therefor a true (right-)libertarian argument is null and fucking void because a minarchist, ideally lateral/egalitarian-in-opportunity, society doesn't exist.

archibald, all you seem to be able to comment on is how poorly gun legislation is written for conossieurs of firearms. do you have a real argument against gun control in principle or just nitpicking the firearm neophyte dems who write the legislation?

and melch, plenty of people still post here long after they quit playing.

[Grievear]

By your own admission you haven't played FFXI in such time, or apparently haven't seen a thread in advanced in the past... 2 years that you didn't know what LM-17 meant. So I reiterate, why are you shitting up threads on a forum related to a game you don't play?

I wasn't aware that I had to turn in my membership and stop reading the General Discussion forums once I quit FFXI. In fact, by definition, this forum has rules that prevent any discussion related to the game I used to play. You say I'm shitting up this thread, but you're taking it far more off topic than I ever did.

Besides, trolling liberals is fun. You're just a babe, caught up in the crossfire.

[Papasmurf-Phoenix]

Well, I have read most of this thread (some wasn't worth reading LOL) but all this Obama wants to ban/restrict handguns, assault rifles, etc. is mostly about getting votes. Scare the ppl and they gonna look for someone who can protect them.
Bill Clinton has had some gun issues on his agenda and tried (or actually did?) pass some laws and what did they do? Absolutly nothing!
I think if you let the government restrict you they will do it, no matter what the issue.
For these laws to really have an effect it would take decades since there are already so many guns in circulation.
The argument about criminals not obtaining guns so they can't commit crimes is, imo, flawed. They don't care about laws; hence, they'd get an illegal one.
About crime rates with guns and comparing countries, it is also about the social structure but not so much about legal availability of guns. In Austria and Switzerland you can buy guns and handguns for home protection. Do they have a lot of Columbines? Nope!
In Germany, with severe gun restrictions, 99% of deaths with a firearm involved were either committed with an illegal gun or those ppl were acting, sorry for lacking the right term, out of the situation (not planned) and those would have used anything in their range, like kitchen knives, sledge hammer, etc.

With a hunter's greeting

Papasmurf



PS. avatar shows my 1st wild boar ever^^ Little piglet weighing in at 25kg (roughly 55lbs)

[Tristam]

Well, I have read most of this thread (some wasn't worth reading LOL) but all this Obama wants to ban/restrict handguns, assault rifles, etc. is mostly about getting votes. Scare the ppl and they gonna look for someone who can protect them.
Bill Clinton has had some gun issues on his agenda and tried (or actually did?) pass some laws and what did they do? Absolutly nothing!
I think if you let the government restrict you they will do it, no matter what the issue.
For these laws to really have an effect it would take decades since there are already so many guns in circulation.
The argument about criminals not obtaining guns so they can't commit crimes is, imo, flawed. They don't care about laws; hence, they'd get an illegal one.
About crime rates with guns and comparing countries, it is also about the social structure but not so much about legal availability of guns. In Austria and Switzerland you can buy guns and handguns for home protection. Do they have a lot of Columbines? Nope!
In Germany, with severe gun restrictions, 99% of deaths with a firearm involved were either committed with an illegal gun or those ppl were acting, sorry for lacking the right term, out of the situation (not planned) and those would have used anything in their range, like kitchen knives, sledge hammer, etc.

With a hunter's greeting

Papasmurf



PS. avatar shows my 1st wild boar ever^^ Little piglet weighing in at 25kg (roughly 55lbs)

Switzerland dosen't have a full time army and instead every single man must spend a few days or weeks training for armed service. From 21-35 all men are REQUIRED to keep an assault rifle at home. Guns and *safety* are instrumental to their society, and if every man was required to train and serve in the national guard, I bet we'd see less gun violence in america too.

For Germany, the overall homicide rate is a small fraction of what the US's is, again a success for gun control legislation, this isn't the example you were looking for.

Edit: Also, gun ownership in Germany is 3x that of Austria, and while the overall murder rate in Germany is lower the gun murder rate is higher. Fancy that!

edit x2: Looked up the US homicide rate by year, the assault weapons ban went into effect in 1994, guess what started happening after that? I doubt it's the major reason but if you say the Clinton gun legislation (Brady ban, assault weapons ban, 5 day waiting, NICS) had no effect, I'm going to need to see something other than your personal opinion.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicid.../totalstab.htm

[Papasmurf-Phoenix]

Switzerland dosen't have a full time army and instead every single man must spend a few days or weeks training for armed service. From 21-35 all men are REQUIRED to keep an assault rifle at home. Guns and *safety* are instrumental to their society, and if every man was required to train and serve in the national guard, I bet we'd see less gun violence in america too.

For Germany, the overall homicide rate is a small fraction of what the US's is, again a success for gun control legislation, this isn't the example you were looking for.

Edit: Also, gun ownership in Germany is 3x that of Austria, and while the overall murder rate in Germany is lower the gun murder rate is higher. Fancy that!

Dear Tristam,

I think they are about to change the "REQUIRED" in Switzerland (btw, only ppl who did the mandatory military service there got one furnished by the army and they are not allowed to do any changes to this equipment.) They already trying to get the handguns back into their armory, too...
Anyhow, you missed my 2 points:
1) Even though the gun murder rate in Germany and Austria is lower than the US' the guns used in homicides in AUS and GER are 99% illegal ones or those individuals would have used anything else if they had no gun available. Banning guns in general would have little to no effect on the overall numbers of homicides.
2) It is also a question of the social, educational, etc. aspects of the countries. Comparing different countries like the USA, Colombia, Austria, Germany, and Korea is quite difficult and to only do it in terms of gun laws and homicides with guns involved is like comparing apples and oranges.

About your edit, Germany has got some of the toughest laws worldwide to get access to guns (need brains to get guns and more brains means less gun abuse ), in Austria on the other hand you only have to be a resident to buy a hand gun for self-defense purpose not to mention rifles...and if you check the statistics from that webpage linked earlier with homicides you might see that the suicide rate in Austria including guns is way above Germany's. Those were committed with legal guns. Gun restriction here would only result in ppl throwing themselves in front of trains or them buying more rope...

Edit Meant this link from a few pages back http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate


@Tristam Edit1 Total numbers of guns or %-wise comparing numbers of guns in relation to total population?
Edit2 Yes, IMO (got no numbers to back it up, sadly, but I look some into it ) though I grant you it prolly had at least a slight impact but your chart
is total homicide and not just involving guns.

[Papasmurf-Phoenix]

edit x2: Looked up the US homicide rate by year, the assault weapons ban went into effect in 1994, guess what started happening after that? I doubt it's the major reason but if you say the Clinton gun legislation (Brady ban, assault weapons ban, 5 day waiting, NICS) had no effect, I'm going to need to see something other than your personal opinion.
Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide Trends in the United States:

Here some Info about the effectiveness of the Brady Ban:

The Violence Policy Center blames technicalities in a non-peer-reviewed publication: "Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing 'post-ban' assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. The VPC estimates that more than one million assault weapons have been manufactured since the ban's passage in 1994."[4] By another point of view, manufacturers responded precisely to the changing legal requirements, making and selling exactly what was legally permitted.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence examined the impact of the Assault Weapons Ban in a 2004 non-peer reviewed report entitled On Target: The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Act.[8] The report looked at 1.4 million guns involved in crime and determined that "since the law’s enactment ... assault weapons have made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime — a drop of 66% from the pre-ban rate" and that the Act prevented 60,000 assault weapon crimes over its 10-year period." Based on this statement a 66% drop would only correlate to slightly greater than 3% change in the rate of gun violence given a 1.61% rate of gun violence post-ban.

Source: Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is all about how you sell it and this was a great publicity stunt with little impact. However, I do not know why the overall decline of homicides. I checked on gang related homicides and, e.g., no change there in total numbers comparing 1993 and 2001 in Los Angelos.

[Tristam]

Dear Tristam,

I think they are about to change the "REQUIRED" in Switzerland (btw, only ppl who did the mandatory military service there got one furnished by the army and they are not allowed to do any changes to this equipment.) They already trying to get the handguns back into their armory, too...
Anyhow, you missed my 2 points:
1) Even though the gun murder rate in Germany and Austria is lower than the US' the guns used in homicides in AUS and GER are 99% illegal ones or those individuals would have used anything else if they had no gun available. Banning guns in general would have little to no effect on the overall numbers of homicides.
2) It is also a question of the social, educational, etc. aspects of the countries. Comparing different countries like the USA, Colombia, Austria, Germany, and Korea is quite difficult and to only do it in terms of gun laws and homicides with guns involved is like comparing apples and oranges.

About your edit, Germany has got some of the toughest laws worldwide to get access to guns (need brains to get guns and more brains means less gun abuse ), in Austria on the other hand you only have to be a resident to buy a hand gun for self-defense purpose not to mention rifles...and if you check the statistics from that webpage linked earlier with homicides you might see that the suicide rate in Austria including guns is way above Germany's. Those were committed with legal guns. Gun restriction here would only result in ppl throwing themselves in front of trains or them buying more rope...

Edit Meant this link from a few pages back List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


@Tristam Edit1 Total numbers of guns or %-wise comparing numbers of guns in relation to total population?
Edit2 Yes, IMO (got no numbers to back it up, sadly, but I look some into it ) though I grant you it prolly had at least a slight impact but your chart
is total homicide and not just involving guns.

OK, maybe I'm not entirely sure what your argument is but let me reiterate my stance, I am NOT pushing a handgun ban in the united states, I am pushing stricter national regulation of all firearms including handguns.

It appears I mixed up my statistics for Germany and Austria, (EDIT: and it was % of total population that owns a gun, not # of guns), but your correction shows the exact same trend I was trying to point out, that tighter regulations result in both fewer homicides and suicides. If 99% of firearm homicides are due to illegal guns but your overall rate of firearm deaths is a small fraction of other countries' isn't that a good thing? That means your rate of firearm homicides with legally obtained guns is close to 0%! Congratulations? If you look at Hemenway's publications out of Harvard, he's shown that there is a direct correlation between household gun ownership and suicide rate in the united states. This trend persists at a county level in individual states and is irrespective of age. For the case of Germany, I tentatively agree that a gun ban would not reduce the homicide rate, but like you said Germany is already very restrictive on guns and already has a very low gun homicide rate, isn't this a good thing? Do you not agree with Germany's weapons restrictions?

For your second point,in *western industrialized countries* if there is a primary socioeconomic difference between the countries that directly correlates with homicide rate, what is it and why has it been so difficult to show? Poverty is of course a factor, yet the percentage of people living in poverty in the US and Germany are roughly equal, there is a twofold difference in poverty % between Austria and Germany, and the poverty level of the UK is slightly *higher* than that of the US, so it can't just be poverty. Simply put, there must be another factor, my contention is that it is gun availability.
List of countries by percentage of population living in poverty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the brady laws, I should clarify that the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban are *not* the same thing. The brady bill introduced federal background checks, 5-day waiting periods, and some very basic safety regulations. Wikipedia has a chart (from the FBI uniform crime report) comparing gun homicides to knife and other homicides and the major decrease after 1994 was gun homicides, knives and others didn't have nearly a similar drop. I agree that the AWB was largely cosmetic, but I do not agree that the Brady Bill was ineffectual. My personal opinion is that the Brady Bill does not go nearly far enough, but it's a start.

[archibaldcrane]

archibald, all you seem to be able to comment on is how poorly gun legislation is written for conossieurs of firearms. do you have a real argument against gun control in principle or just nitpicking the firearm neophyte dems who write the legislation?

It just depends on what you mean by "gun control". I have no problem with waiting periods or background checks, and additional legislation strengthening these things I'd be all for. If people want to introduce legislation requiring training before purchase of your first gun, I'd have no problem with it (but if the supreme court shot it down I'd also be ok with that). Mandatory trigger locks...I'm less sold on that personally but I understand those who push for it and in most circumstances think they are a good idea. I don't have much of a problem with the severe restrictions put on ownership of fully-auto weapons, tanks, explosives, flamethrowers, etc. I think that gun shows should be subject to the exact same laws as retailers.

However...

I think the push to "ban guns", beyond where they were banned 20 years ago, is bullshit. I grew up around guns. There were probably at least 4 or 5 in my parents' house while I was growing up along with my two siblings. My brother and I have both taken hunter's safety courses and both hunted when we were early teenagers. My sister spent 5 years in the army. My brother has a pistol for home defense that he shoots at the range as well. My uncles all did or still do deer hunt, as did both of my grandfathers. I occasionally pistol and revolver target shoot at the gun range here in downtown L.A. with guns I rent from the range. I have a large family, and guns have been a part of it since well before I was born. We aren't "gun nuts" - guns are tools to be respected, and we treat them appropriately. I also personally think they are exceptionally fun to shoot.

Saying that my family shouldn't be allowed to own guns (most of them being semi-automatic hunting rifles), some of which have been in our family for over 3 generations without a single incident of any sort is a personal insult to me and my family. People in this thread are telling me that I shouldn't be allowed to own something because I cannot own it responsibly, when I have over 3 generations of experience in my family saying otherwise.

Stripping the rights of the many, many responsible gun owners out there because a small portion of people, many of whom already do not have the legal right to possess a gun because of prior offenses, use them in commission of other, also illegal, crimes, is something that really, really rubs me the wrong way. In general, I hate laws that restrict freedom that are solely in an effort to prevent -other- laws from being broken - in this case murder, armed robbery, and so forth. Those things are already illegal.