Speaking of gun control...

[sandorski]

Yeah, local laws are useless, so it's good thing we have federal laws against drugs. Drugs are now impossible to get in this country...

Guns and Drugs are very different.

 

[master_shake_]

oh america you're so classy, hows that 100+ trillion dollar debt now?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323353204578127374039087636.html

maybe you can use your guns to shoot it away...:awe:

 

[HumblePie]

BS.

Then why has every mass murder shooting in America, except 1, taken place in gun free, or gun banned areas?

Never has a mass murder shooting been taken place by someone "going postal" at the drop of a hat. Every single time it's been planned out by someone well in advance to do as much damage as they can. To do that they take multiple gun/rounds. They wear body armor now. They target areas that are likely to have large groups of people and where those people are unlikely to shoot back. They do so in areas that would have a long response time by emergency personnel.

These are all verifiable and un-refutable FACTS. It is easier to prey upon the weak than the strong. Another basic of human nature and the natural world. Speaking of the natural world, predators don't go after the strongest of a herd when they strike, they go for the oldest, slowest, and weakest. Hence why the term "prey upon the weak" was coined. Criminals are no different than predators. They are looking for the easy buck, the fast thrill, and the way to accomplish that is not to go after the heavily armed. The vast majority of crimes in ANY country are against the weak. The very rarest of crimes, and usually those are done by people looking to make a political point go after harder targets like cops or military bases that are alert and armed.

What strict gun controls have done in places like DC, Chicago, NY and other places of high violent crime in America is take the guns out of hands of law abiding citizens and left them in the hands of the criminals. They have given these criminals a target rich environment of potential victims that can no longer defend themselves reasonably.

 

[olds]

BS.

Now you're just trolling.

http://www.examiner.com/article/what-really-scares-criminals-armed-citizens

 

[sandorski]

Then why has every mass murder shooting in America, except 1, taken place in gun free, or gun banned areas?

Never has a mass murder shooting been taken place by someone "going postal" at the drop of a hat. Every single time it's been planned out by someone well in advance to do as much damage as they can. To do that they take multiple gun/rounds. They wear body armor now. They target areas that are likely to have large groups of people and where those people are unlikely to shoot back. They do so in areas that would have a long response time by emergency personnel.

These are all verifiable and un-refutable FACTS. It is easier to prey upon the weak than the strong. Another basic of human nature and the natural world. Speaking of the natural world, predators don't go after the strongest of a herd when they strike, they go for the oldest, slowest, and weakest. Hence why the term "prey upon the weak" was coined. Criminals are no different than predators. They are looking for the easy buck, the fast thrill, and the way to accomplish that is not to go after the heavily armed. The vast majority of crimes in ANY country are against the weak. The very rarest of crimes, and usually those are done by people looking to make a political point go after harder targets like cops or military bases that are alert and armed.

What strict gun controls have done in places like DC, Chicago, NY and other places of high violent crime in America is take the guns out of hands of law abiding citizens and left them in the hands of the criminals. They have given these criminals a target rich environment of potential victims that can no longer defend themselves reasonably.

Sources?

 

[HumblePie]

Sources?

There are been several links posted in the recent gun control threads that pointed to those sources. Why don't you google it and figure it out. I read those sources and I'm not your wikipedia. Do your own damn homework.

Since I already had one link in my browser recent history. I'll be nice and post it. This is one of many from a journalist that used the same facts.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund#

 

[BoberFett]

Dumb. Washington was not fighting anyone when the 2nd Amendment was ratified.

So past events don't shape the future? I'm sure you realize that one of events leading to the revolution was the confiscation of the arms and ammunition stored in town armories, and how that is at least partly responsible for the 2nd being an individual right rather than a communal right? If our right to bear arms hinged on them being held in a government owned armory, then it's no right at all, as it can be removed without due process.

 

[BoberFett]

Guns and Drugs are very different.

Wrong.

 

[HumblePie]

Oh and that article referenced this paper...

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=161637

Basically a study that showed that the ONLY thing that reduces or increases the risk of mass shootings shown to date is gun controlled areas. Threats of prison time, or execution, or strong punishment law against this doesn't matter.

Why? The people DOING this expect to die. They are doing it to make a very specific statement of violence. They are doing it to inflict mass damage in the most efficient way possible and then usually have the intention of killing themselves. The only effective deterrent to mass murders looking to do their deed is someone with a concealed weapon being there.

 

[Olikan]

Wrong.

drugs are recreative, guns aren't

Basically a study that showed that the ONLY thing that reduces or increases the risk of mass shootings shown to date is gun controlled areas. Threats of prison time, or execution, or strong punishment law against this doesn't matter.

as already said.... assualt guns are the most efective weapon to kill people, bombs or knifes aren't even close to it.
face it, it's impossible to "heal" every crazy guy... countryes were guns were simply banned made a HUGE diference on the kill number

 

[Colt45]

Here is the logic fail you have employed here.

1) It was stated, and is a true fact, that both DC and NY have the strictest gun control laws in America

2) It was stated, and a true fact, that both DC and NY have some of the worst crime rates, especially violent crimes, than the rest of America

You've got cause and effect backwards here. NYC, DC, Chicago, etc, had high crime before they had tough gun laws.

Not that I think city bans do any good... however they don't turn cities into crime ridden shitholes, either. That came first.

 

[HumblePie]

drugs are recreative, guns aren't



as already said.... assualt guns are the most efective weapon to kill people, bombs or knifes aren't even close to it.
face it, it's impossible to "heal" every crazy guy... countryes were guns were simply banned made a HUGE diference on the kill number

You misread that entire post. When I said gun controlled areas, I was referencing the fact that normal law abiding citizens with guns are the only deterrence to mass shooting murders. It has been found to be the ONLY effective thing to it. Nothing else. And Gun free zones actually make appealing targets to those whackos. THAT is also what that paper and study revealed.

And no, guns are not the most effective weapon to kill people. BOMBS are. They are the easiest to come by, create, and use. The worst mass murders in history since the invention of the gun have ALL been done with bombs. Not guns.

Before that, it was with swords.

 

[HumblePie]

You've got cause and effect backwards here. NYC, DC, Chicago, etc, had high crime before they had tough gun laws.

Not that I think city bans do any good... however they don't turn cities into crime ridden shitholes, either. That came first.

I am doing neither. They had high crime rates because they were large areas that had a large portion of poor people. They had violence before AND after strict gun control laws. The laws have done nothing for them. In fact, violence increased for a very long time in those cities until OTHER measures, which weren't control laws, were put in place. Many other factors have reduced violent crime and crime rates of those cities, but they are once again on the rise due to those factors no longer being in place. Mainly due to recession. When people get poor and desperate they commit crimes. Those places still have strict gun laws, but the crime rate is going up again, including violent crime rate and has for a few years now.

Which shows that the gun control does nothing for crime rates in those cities. It was making better lives for more people that reduces crime and violence. THAT is the only really effective way to reduce crime.

 

[Matt1970]

When someone can simply leave their City Limits and buy a Gun that they can transport back without any inspection upon returning, the City Law is pointless.

And now you see how effective the majority of gun laws are. People will just sidestep them like they always have.

 

[BoberFett]

drugs are recreative, guns aren't

Wrong.

 

[Matt1970]

drugs are recreative, guns aren't



as already said.... assualt guns are the most efective weapon to kill people, bombs or knifes aren't even close to it.
face it, it's impossible to "heal" every crazy guy... countryes were guns were simply banned made a HUGE diference on the kill number

Hardly the most effective. A bomb can kill hundreds of people in less than a second and you don't have to aim the thing.

 

[Cerb]

drugs are recreative, guns aren't

Again, wrong. I've never used a gun outside of a recreational environment, in fact.

as already said.... assualt guns are the most efective weapon to kill people, bombs or knifes aren't even close to it.
face it, it's impossible to "heal" every crazy guy...

Wrong. Any gun is effective at killing people (more effective than bombs, though? I think not). The defining of some as assault weapons has been based on criteria that make little to no difference.

If a person has practiced shooting and reloading, you won't have time to do anything while he loads a new 10-round clip, FI (esp. since a crazy guy on a murder spree won't care about recovering the empty clip, which is part of why it takes everyone else seconds to do). Or, as has been common practice, they'll just bring more guns--less practice needed, that way.

countryes were guns were simply banned made a HUGE diference on the kill number

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Wrong, again. Please, educate yourself on the matter. Countries which have banned guns and had lower crime rates already had lower crime rates, and already had low gun ownership. Correlation is not causation. It doesn't hold in either direction. Gun ownership rates seem to affect common types of crime committed, but not the overall rates of crime in general, nor murder.

Fact is, we've steadily decreased the availability of public psychiatric care, both in ease and funding, we like to pretend people with serious mental problems are not a danger, until it is too late, and and we stigmatize those too far out of the realm of being normal, so that people have reason to hide and/or brush off warning signs.

A normal upstanding citizen with a gun is not going to up and shoot people. Usually, they don't even shoot people when they are using the gun to stop a crime, either (though, many that would seem to have the habit of becoming police).

Effective gun control will not start with classifying weapons, but classifying the mental fitness of potential gun owners, and whomever they live with.

 

[Fern]

OP posts this:

Not my words... the provincial police's. I would think they know a thing or two about this subject.

Then I read this:

“There are women walking in the Walmart with baby carriages wearing .45s on their hips in the U.S.” he said.

“And they wonder why their crime is so crazy.”

Then I lol'd.

Fern

 

[Fern]

-snip-
as already said.... assualt guns are the most efective weapon to kill people, bombs or knifes aren't even close to it.
face it, it's impossible to "heal" every crazy guy... countryes were guns were simply banned made a HUGE diference on the kill number

Read this:

The Bath School disaster is the name given to three bombings in Bath Township, Michigan, on May 18, 1927, which killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, and four other adults; at least 58 people were injured. The perpetrator first killed his wife, then committed suicide with his last explosion. Most of the victims were children in the second to sixth grades (7–14 years of age[1]) attending the Bath Consolidated School. Their deaths constitute the deadliest mass murder in a school in United States history.[2]

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

Fern

 

[Theb]

I don't think I've met a woman that used a .45 as a carry piece (or many men).

 

[BoberFett]

Hahahahaha!

Assault gun.

 

[Cerb]

I don't think I've met a woman that used a .45 as a carry piece (or many men).

I've never seen a woman carrying such, but if I go to a hardware store other than Lowes, HD, or Ace, it's fairly common sight to see them as side-arms, usually revolvers. Surely, some of them probably go shop at Walmart.

My understanding is that they're rather good against large aggressive animals, which some urbanites might think are fairy tales.

 

[olds]

Gun forum I am on has been slow lately...

WebSevers are a pair of 4CPU / 32GB front end machines. Database Server is a 8CPU / 64GB box

every single one of our Firearms/2A/RKBA - websites is tripling or more their traffic pattern

The past couple days your site has literally just had all 8 CPUs - pinned between 99.6%-100% CPU non-stop for hours on end.

As you know we don't like to make you worry about the hardware; I've got a pair of 16CPU / 128GB boxes coming in that I'll be trying to get racked and software loaded by end of year.

 

[CLite]

Washington, D.C and NY City have some of the strictest gun laws on the books and both have had extremely high murder rates.

Tell me again how these gun laws are working?

Wtf? NYC has one of the if not the lowest murder rate out of any large city in the USA. There aren't more than one or two large southern cities with a lower murder rate. Out of cities with more than 500,000 people NYC is #3 on the list of lowest crime rating.

I think it has more to do with the broken-windows policies than gun-control but I hate seeing this myth of a dangerous NYC perpuated. I go to NYC constantly, I have many friends who live in NYC, and I have never heard of a single person so much as being pick-pocketed. I've even had idiot friends going to Columbia drop into Harlem late at night to try to buy drugs. They looked so horribly out of place, being nerdy foreigners, the guys they ran into just laughed at them and told them to get the fuck out of there.

 

[xj0hnx]

I don't think I've met a woman that used a .45 as a carry piece (or many men).

My mother actually carries a Kimber .45.