The UK Handgun Ban is so effective...

[Vic]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well i do understand you, it's like how everyone was crying about the EU not being on the side of the US when it came to Iraq and yet some countries in the EU were.

However, each European country is a soverign nation, the same cannot be said for each of the United States.

When i was referring to "that crap" i was referring to you likening the US to Mexico and Russia, i was in no way unclear on that and you're either drunk or willfully dishonest because i know for a fact you are smart enough to understand that.

There is a reason why you cannot compare murder rates WITHIN the US, you can easily buy a gun in any state and take it back with you without having to go through customs or any checks, those statistics are therefore as worthless as the one concerning "illegal guns".

Well then, actually, if I may say so, you have a higher opinion of the US' political system than I do. It works but not as originally intended. It's a strong-central-government federal republic just like Mexico and Russia, not a parliamentary democracy like most European countries. The US is relatively less corrupt than most other similar federal republics in the world, but for that I credit our rather unusual strict adherence to the rule of law, namely this sacred Constitution you and Stalin here are trying to tear apart. So even if gun bans did work, I'd be reluctant to infringe upon the constitution as the peoples' respect for that is about the last thing that holds our govt up from total collapse into totalitarianism.

And BTW, you ignored how many US states with lax gun control have murder rates as low or lower than European countries with gun bans.

If you actually sat down and read my posts instead of being an arsehole who has to jump on everything half sentence then you might actually realise that i have great respect for the US constitution, more than you do, apparently, more than most do, apparently, since you so willfully piss it away by letting your freedoms protected by the constitution be infringed upon.

I love how you first talk about how i shouldn't group all states (which are all adhering to the same federal law and has a constitution and a government in common btw) together but you then go ahead and call some guy Stalin and even though it's glaringly obvious to anyone but the most stupid that him and me are not on the same side, you still group us together.

Free minds are more important than free guns, some get that, others desperately give up anything for safety but cling to that last straw of percieved control.

Which comparable countries have murder rates as high as the US was my first question, you apparently think Mexico and Russia are comparable, i don't, so which comparable countries.

Uhh... have you even read my posts?

The right to own guns is in the constitution. As the amendment process to remove the 2nd would be politically impossible (putting it mildly), the only way to ban guns in the US would be to infringe the constitution. I would think that obvious.

Then, your offense over being grouped with the child aside (I didn't mean it the way you took it), I already explained the states issue and how Mexico and Russia are comparable. If you don't want to address that, fine. I'm not required to repeat myself over and over again to satisfy you.
Don't make the mistake that most people do on PUBLIC message boards. I'm not arguing with you to convince you. As always, the lurkers are watching and reading.

 

[vhx]

Banning guns in America would not work. As someone said earlier, might cause a revolt. I can only imagine police going into Texan homes to try to remove their guns forcibly. Oh dear.

Also remember what happened when they banned alcohol with prohibition? Yeah, crime actually got worse with the organized crime involved in bootlegging it. Al Capone ring a bell?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

"Oh, I have a copy of that bill of sale right here, officer. Let's see, he said his was 'John Smith.'"

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
You actually believe that the US has more in common with Mexico and Russia (it's a fucking dictatorship run by the allies of the state corporate mob for fucks sake) than it does with countries of equal living standards, political system, legal system and immigration rates?

I don't think you honestly believe in that crap Vic.

Well, that's why their murder rates are 4 and 5 times higher than ours.

As usual for a European, your scale of the US is out-of-whack. The US is a nation of nations. It's more like the EU than it is any single nation within the EU. As such, this horrible murder rate statistic you point to is by no means evenly spread out through the states, and in fact most cities and states have rather low murder rates. In fact, the most extreme "gun nut" areas in the US almost always have the lowest murder rates. If you want to point to Finland's murder rate for example, then I could happily refer you to a very comparable state, Oregon (my home BTW), with quite lax gun control laws and and an even lower murder rate than Finland's (2.3 per 100k vs. 2.9). "Wild West" Wyoming's is only 1.74 per 100k. Head on over to "No guns in this town" Washington DC though, and the murder rate is an outrageous 29 per 100k.

So yeah, I do believe that crap. :roll:

Point, set and match.

... to the opposition. Vic reminds me of Wimp Lo.

Do you ever say anything intelligent?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
I don't get what you are saying. How do they know who owns them?

As I pointed out early in this thread, punchkin's argument will depend upon the assumption that all laws are automatically successful the moment they're written.

No. This is how you get Elite status, Vic? It's a shame.

And if you look closely, that's just representative of his petty dictator personality. Note how his arguments are always I'm-right-because-I-say-so yet he rarely backs it up with explanation or elaboration, how he claims pwnage on people even when no pwnage if evident, and will claim to be able to kick people out of the discussion just because he wants to.

All you have to do in order to prove him wrong is just keep doing whatever it is that he thinks you shouldn't be allowed to.

Heh heh. "Lalala..."

I'm shocked and hurt that you didn't attack my postcount too...

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

I'll tell them I sold them to some guy on Anandtech who goes by Punchkin.

If we're lucky they'll shoot you in the face while ransacking your house trying to find your illegal weapons.

 

[punchkin]

Originally posted by: Vic
The right to own guns is in the constitution. As the amendment process to remove the 2nd would be politically impossible (putting it mildly), the only way to ban guns in the US would be to infringe the constitution. I would think that obvious.

The Second wouldn't need to be nullified, just construed by the U.S. Supreme Court. That may well happen in a matter of months, resolving this whole issue. And if it does, and it doesn't go your way, you will continue to whine about your constitutional "right" of gun ownership being "infringed", rights that won't exist even as a possibility at that point.

Especially for a textualist, it takes a lot to read into the Second Amendment a right of gun ownership... it only guarantees the right to "bear" arms...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Really, you also believe that Russia and Mexico are comparable to the US, i guess i view the US as a more free country than it actually is?

That was what my post was about, his babbeling is a straw man if anything is a straw man, how much do you want to bet he'll NEVER admit that though?

Vic seems to think that he's intellectually superior but all he is is intellectually dishonest.

How about you STFU with your whining and address why "Wild West" Wyoming has a lower murder rate than your precious Britain, eh?

 

[punchkin]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

"Oh, I have a copy of that bill of sale right here, officer. Let's see, he said his was 'John Smith.'"

... at which point the seller would have broken the law.

This whole line of argumentation is absolutely moronic, if you are trying to say that most guns couldn't be tracked down....

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

Yes. And your "law abiding citizen" thing seems a little...implicatory of something...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: Vic
The right to own guns is in the constitution. As the amendment process to remove the 2nd would be politically impossible (putting it mildly), the only way to ban guns in the US would be to infringe the constitution. I would think that obvious.

The Second wouldn't need to be nullified, just construed by the U.S. Supreme Court. That may well happen in a matter of months, resolving this whole issue. And if it does, and it doesn't go your way, you will continue to whine about your constitutional "right" of gun ownership being "infringed", rights that won't exist even as a possibility at that point.

Especially for a textualist, it takes a lot to read into the Second Amendment a right of gun ownership... it only guarantees the right to "bear" arms...

All precedent indicates that the court will rule in favor of individual right, not collective. Only a moron, completely ignorant of high school level US history, would think that the framers of the Constitution thought the militia was going to expect the government to arm them, or that the early government would have even been capable of such a thing.

And if you actually read the thread, you would already know that my answer to this is that the ruling won't matter either way in regards to achieving your ideological agenda. Murderers aren't going to be too terribly concerned about the legal status of their weapon while they're in the process of committing murder.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

"Oh, I have a copy of that bill of sale right here, officer. Let's see, he said his was 'John Smith.'"

... at which point the seller would have broken the law.

This whole line of argumentation is absolutely moronic, if you are trying to say that most guns couldn't be tracked down....

Oh no! HE BROKE THE LAW!

Uhh... but actually, no he didn't, and no, they can't. You have a most astounding and profound religious faith in authority. I'm gonna say this is why most people here think you're a child. Because you don't usually see the kind of naivety that you display except in children.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Well i do understand you, it's like how everyone was crying about the EU not being on the side of the US when it came to Iraq and yet some countries in the EU were.

However, each European country is a soverign nation, the same cannot be said for each of the United States.

When i was referring to "that crap" i was referring to you likening the US to Mexico and Russia, i was in no way unclear on that and you're either drunk or willfully dishonest because i know for a fact you are smart enough to understand that.

There is a reason why you cannot compare murder rates WITHIN the US, you can easily buy a gun in any state and take it back with you without having to go through customs or any checks, those statistics are therefore as worthless as the one concerning "illegal guns".

Well then, actually, if I may say so, you have a higher opinion of the US' political system than I do. It works but not as originally intended. It's a strong-central-government federal republic just like Mexico and Russia, not a parliamentary democracy like most European countries. The US is relatively less corrupt than most other similar federal republics in the world, but for that I credit our rather unusual strict adherence to the rule of law, namely this sacred Constitution you and Stalin here are trying to tear apart. So even if gun bans did work, I'd be reluctant to infringe upon the constitution as the peoples' respect for that is about the last thing that holds our govt up from total collapse into totalitarianism.

And BTW, you ignored how many US states with lax gun control have murder rates as low or lower than European countries with gun bans.

If you actually sat down and read my posts instead of being an arsehole who has to jump on everything half sentence then you might actually realise that i have great respect for the US constitution, more than you do, apparently, more than most do, apparently, since you so willfully piss it away by letting your freedoms protected by the constitution be infringed upon.

I love how you first talk about how i shouldn't group all states (which are all adhering to the same federal law and has a constitution and a government in common btw) together but you then go ahead and call some guy Stalin and even though it's glaringly obvious to anyone but the most stupid that him and me are not on the same side, you still group us together.

Free minds are more important than free guns, some get that, others desperately give up anything for safety but cling to that last straw of percieved control.

Which comparable countries have murder rates as high as the US was my first question, you apparently think Mexico and Russia are comparable, i don't, so which comparable countries.

Uhh... have you even read my posts?

The right to own guns is in the constitution. As the amendment process to remove the 2nd would be politically impossible (putting it mildly), the only way to ban guns in the US would be to infringe the constitution. I would think that obvious.

Then, your offense over being grouped with the child aside (I didn't mean it the way you took it), I already explained the states issue and how Mexico and Russia are comparable. If you don't want to address that, fine. I'm not required to repeat myself over and over again to satisfy you.
Don't make the mistake that most people do on PUBLIC message boards. I'm not arguing with you to convince you. As always, the lurkers are watching and reading.

I've already said that i have no say in the US question.

This is about the UK and banning handguns, it should be obvious why i have a say in that and i strongly disagree that the US is anything like the brutally corrupt police state (not in the traditional sense so much as in the local sense) that is Mexico or the pseudo dictatorship that allows the mob to run free that is Russia.

I've already adressed that, the US is, of course, comparable to other democracies that have a similar political system, a similar economy, a similar law enforcement, a similar constitution or "ground law" as some countries have instead of the constitution, it's basically the same thing.

Population doesn't really matter unless you are just counting numbers and not per capita, does it?

I get that you are not arguing with me because you obviously don't bother to read what i write before you respond.

We've debated in the past and i've enjoyed it, i feel like i have an understanding for your position, even learned some things and that you are a smart motherfucker and now you just.. Seem as daft as that 16 year old twat that does the exact same thing.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Really, you also believe that Russia and Mexico are comparable to the US, i guess i view the US as a more free country than it actually is?

That was what my post was about, his babbeling is a straw man if anything is a straw man, how much do you want to bet he'll NEVER admit that though?

Vic seems to think that he's intellectually superior but all he is is intellectually dishonest.

How about you STFU with your whining and address why "Wild West" Wyoming has a lower murder rate than your precious Britain, eh?

My preeeecious?

Oh, well it has 10x the murder rate of the Falkland Islands, doesn't it?

You want to play that game then let me remind you that a fair share of the commonwealth can be picked apart into very small pieces.

I didn't do that originally because i thought we were comparing nations, not areas of nations.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

Uh... yes. It's true in pretty much ever state. This is what they refer to as "the gun show loophole." Face to face transfers between individuals not involving a federal firearm dealer.

And only 4 or 5 states register guns, IIRC, and have fairly strict gun laws. As a result, few people in those states own guns, and ~90% of the guns in America are not registered. You referenced giving your contact information when you buy a gun. You know it's illegal for the government to collect that information from the dealers, right? I held an FFL for years. You destroy your 4473s (the form used to sell any title I firearm) after 10 years. The government doesn't have copies, or any of the information from the forms.

When the dealer calls in to NICS (National Instant Check System) a person's identifying information (name, or social is optional) and the type of firearm to be transfered is given (long gun or handgun.) The exact make of the gun, nor quantity of guns being sold are disclosed.

So as I said, about 90% of the guns estimated to be in the US are unregistered. They're sold through face to face transfers every day, on Craigslist, on AR15.com, even on AT's for sale and trade section.

The best they could do is look at people who do have registered weapons in the states that require it, as well as the people who have registered Title II weapons (machine guns, silencers, grenade launchers, artillery, mortars, etc) and the people with concealed handgun licenses (if the states would willingly give up those lists.) Then they can go door to door with SWAT teams trying to collect guns. A lot of people will say they lost them in a boating accident, or sold them years ago. Are you going to say that their prior registration or concealed handgun license is probable cause to search their house? Because then you're trampling a whole new part of the bill of rights. And then there's the people who valiantly stand up and say, if you want these guns, you can have the bullets first. And if even 2% of gun owners had that reaction, the plan would fail. There aren't enough police officers (let alone those willing to take part in this) and once they started dying by the dozens (you do know your grandpas deer rifle from 1936 will blow through police body armor like it isn't even there, right?) the plan will be abandoned because no cop wants to die trying to take away someone's innanimate object.

You clearly know very little about guns, or how they work, or they're obtained or used. I've carried a gun every day for about 15 years, and never gone on a killing spree. I've stopped numerous assaults in progress, and saved my own life twice. Most people in the world are good guys. A few are bad guys. If everyone has guns, the good guys win. If you ban guns, the bad guys still have them, and the good guys are hosed.

For years I've slept with a weapon (used to be an M4, now a PS90) next to my bed loaded with AP (armor piercing) ammunition, because I've always figured that it's just as likely for the bad guys coming through my front door to be wearing body armor with three letters on it as it is for them to be street criminals. And if you think I'd have even a moment's hesitation dropping the hammer on either of them, you're dead wrong. From my cold dead hands.

Are you willing to have me killed because I won't give up my guns? Why don't you come take it yourself then?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

Uh... yes. It's true in pretty much ever state. This is what they refer to as "the gun show loophole." Face to face transfers between individuals not involving a federal firearm dealer.

And only 4 or 5 states register guns, IIRC, and have fairly strict gun laws. As a result, few people in those states own guns, and ~90% of the guns in America are not registered. You referenced giving your contact information when you buy a gun. You know it's illegal for the government to collect that information from the dealers, right? I held an FFL for years. You destroy your 4473s (the form used to sell any title I firearm) after 10 years. The government doesn't have copies, or any of the information from the forms.

When the dealer calls in to NICS (National Instant Check System) a person's identifying information (name, or social is optional) and the type of firearm to be transfered is given (long gun or handgun.) The exact make of the gun, nor quantity of guns being sold are disclosed.

So as I said, about 90% of the guns estimated to be in the US are unregistered. They're sold through face to face transfers every day, on Craigslist, on AR15.com, even on AT's for sale and trade section.

The best they could do is look at people who do have registered weapons in the states that require it, as well as the people who have registered Title II weapons (machine guns, silencers, grenade launchers, artillery, mortars, etc) and the people with concealed handgun licenses (if the states would willingly give up those lists.) Then they can go door to door with SWAT teams trying to collect guns. A lot of people will say they lost them in a boating accident, or sold them years ago. Are you going to say that their prior registration or concealed handgun license is probable cause to search their house? Because then you're trampling a whole new part of the bill of rights. And then there's the people who valiantly stand up and say, if you want these guns, you can have the bullets first. And if even 2% of gun owners had that reaction, the plan would fail. There aren't enough police officers (let alone those willing to take part in this) and once they started dying by the dozens (you do know your grandpas deer rifle from 1936 will blow through police body armor like it isn't even there, right?) the plan will be abandoned because no cop wants to die trying to take away someone's innanimate object.

You clearly know very little about guns, or how they work, or they're obtained or used. I've carried a gun every day for about 15 years, and never gone on a killing spree. I've stopped numerous assaults in progress, and saved my own life twice. Most people in the world are good guys. A few are bad guys. If everyone has guns, the good guys win. If you ban guns, the bad guys still have them, and the good guys are hosed.

For years I've slept with a weapon (used to be an M4, now a PS90) next to my bed loaded with AP (armor piercing) ammunition, because I've always figured that it's just as likely for the bad guys coming through my front door to be wearing body armor with three letters on it as it is for them to be street criminals. And if you think I'd have even a moment's hesitation dropping the hammer on either of them, you're dead wrong. From my cold dead hands.

Are you willing to have me killed because I won't give up my guns? Why don't you come take it yourself then?

Paranoia... you're doing it right.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Really, you also believe that Russia and Mexico are comparable to the US, i guess i view the US as a more free country than it actually is?

That was what my post was about, his babbeling is a straw man if anything is a straw man, how much do you want to bet he'll NEVER admit that though?

Vic seems to think that he's intellectually superior but all he is is intellectually dishonest.

How about you STFU with your whining and address why "Wild West" Wyoming has a lower murder rate than your precious Britain, eh?

My preeeecious?

Oh, well it has 10x the murder rate of the Falkland Islands, doesn't it?

You want to play that game then let me remind you that a fair share of the commonwealth can be picked apart into very small pieces.

I didn't do that originally because i thought we were comparing nations, not areas of nations.

Once again, the US is a nation of nations. We have a few states nearly as populous and economically powerful as Britain.
I was making comparisons to US states directly comparable to EU countries, i.e. Oregon to Finland, etc. You ignored all that.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Really, you also believe that Russia and Mexico are comparable to the US, i guess i view the US as a more free country than it actually is?

That was what my post was about, his babbeling is a straw man if anything is a straw man, how much do you want to bet he'll NEVER admit that though?

Vic seems to think that he's intellectually superior but all he is is intellectually dishonest.

How about you STFU with your whining and address why "Wild West" Wyoming has a lower murder rate than your precious Britain, eh?

My preeeecious?

Oh, well it has 10x the murder rate of the Falkland Islands, doesn't it?

You want to play that game then let me remind you that a fair share of the commonwealth can be picked apart into very small pieces.

I didn't do that originally because i thought we were comparing nations, not areas of nations.

A Police Chief moved out of his house in London because kids were hanging out on his wall, and he was afraid to confront them. Family men, fathers are being KICKED TO DEATH every week in England for confronting these "yobs." All you have to do is google "yobs" and you'll find thousands of stories of people being victimized, robbed, raped and brutalized on the streets of England with NO recourse. Look at the various policemen's blogs, and you'll hear them saying crime has never been worse in England, and that if they, the police, lay hands on a yob, they are severely disciplined and seen as a rogue vigilante cop. Your Home Secretary just came out and said that she wouldn't walk the streets of London at night because they aren't safe, and that no one should need to! All the while your politicians are guarded by men with guns, while the average person on the street is left to fend for themselves with nothing but their fists, and if they actually take on some yobs and win, they'll be carted off to jail for assault.

So maybe England's murder rate is lower. But are you familiar with the phrase, "I'd rather die a free man than live as a slave?" The people of England have become slaves. Slaves to their own government, that's selling them out to immigrants, and slaves to criminals who do as they wish without fear of retribution. So yeah, they aren't killed as much as us. But I'd rather die in a shootout with a mugger than get my ass kicked by that same mugger, then cower in the corner till he came back to give me another dose. Who wants to live like that? Not me, and apparently not the English, since their emigration rate (leaving) is skyrocketing lately.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

Uh... yes. It's true in pretty much ever state. This is what they refer to as "the gun show loophole." Face to face transfers between individuals not involving a federal firearm dealer.

And only 4 or 5 states register guns, IIRC, and have fairly strict gun laws. As a result, few people in those states own guns, and ~90% of the guns in America are not registered. You referenced giving your contact information when you buy a gun. You know it's illegal for the government to collect that information from the dealers, right? I held an FFL for years. You destroy your 4473s (the form used to sell any title I firearm) after 10 years. The government doesn't have copies, or any of the information from the forms.

When the dealer calls in to NICS (National Instant Check System) a person's identifying information (name, or social is optional) and the type of firearm to be transfered is given (long gun or handgun.) The exact make of the gun, nor quantity of guns being sold are disclosed.

So as I said, about 90% of the guns estimated to be in the US are unregistered. They're sold through face to face transfers every day, on Craigslist, on AR15.com, even on AT's for sale and trade section.

The best they could do is look at people who do have registered weapons in the states that require it, as well as the people who have registered Title II weapons (machine guns, silencers, grenade launchers, artillery, mortars, etc) and the people with concealed handgun licenses (if the states would willingly give up those lists.) Then they can go door to door with SWAT teams trying to collect guns. A lot of people will say they lost them in a boating accident, or sold them years ago. Are you going to say that their prior registration or concealed handgun license is probable cause to search their house? Because then you're trampling a whole new part of the bill of rights. And then there's the people who valiantly stand up and say, if you want these guns, you can have the bullets first. And if even 2% of gun owners had that reaction, the plan would fail. There aren't enough police officers (let alone those willing to take part in this) and once they started dying by the dozens (you do know your grandpas deer rifle from 1936 will blow through police body armor like it isn't even there, right?) the plan will be abandoned because no cop wants to die trying to take away someone's innanimate object.

You clearly know very little about guns, or how they work, or they're obtained or used. I've carried a gun every day for about 15 years, and never gone on a killing spree. I've stopped numerous assaults in progress, and saved my own life twice. Most people in the world are good guys. A few are bad guys. If everyone has guns, the good guys win. If you ban guns, the bad guys still have them, and the good guys are hosed.

For years I've slept with a weapon (used to be an M4, now a PS90) next to my bed loaded with AP (armor piercing) ammunition, because I've always figured that it's just as likely for the bad guys coming through my front door to be wearing body armor with three letters on it as it is for them to be street criminals. And if you think I'd have even a moment's hesitation dropping the hammer on either of them, you're dead wrong. From my cold dead hands.

Are you willing to have me killed because I won't give up my guns? Why don't you come take it yourself then?

Paranoia... you're doing it right.

Really? I'm paranoid? Just like someone who buys insurance, eh? I just came back from a couple hours at the dog park with my dogs. I had a great time, chatted with 10 or 15 other people as the dogs played, then stopped by the grocery store on the way home. My H&K USP Compact was with me the entire time, and yet I didn't even think about it once. In fact, my cell phone was more of a bother to me than my gun was.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Nebor

A Police Chief moved out of his house in London because kids were hanging out on his wall, and he was afraid to confront them. Family men, fathers are being KICKED TO DEATH every week in England for confronting these "yobs." All you have to do is google "yobs" and you'll find thousands of stories of people being victimized, robbed, raped and brutalized on the streets of England with NO recourse. Look at the various policemen's blogs, and you'll hear them saying crime has never been worse in England, and that if they, the police, lay hands on a yob, they are severely disciplined and seen as a rogue vigilante cop. Your Home Secretary just came out and said that she wouldn't walk the streets of London at night because they aren't safe, and that no one should need to! All the while your politicians are guarded by men with guns, while the average person on the street is left to fend for themselves with nothing but their fists, and if they actually take on some yobs and win, they'll be carted off to jail for assault.

So maybe England's murder rate is lower. But are you familiar with the phrase, "I'd rather die a free man than live as a slave?" The people of England have become slaves. Slaves to their own government, that's selling them out to immigrants, and slaves to criminals who do as they wish without fear of retribution. So yeah, they aren't killed as much as us. But I'd rather die in a shootout with a mugger than get my ass kicked by that same mugger, then cower in the corner till he came back to give me another dose. Who wants to live like that? Not me, and apparently not the English, since their emigration rate (leaving) is skyrocketing lately.

You just don't understand their culture. The Queen will take care of them. You don't need rights when you have a Queen.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Really, you also believe that Russia and Mexico are comparable to the US, i guess i view the US as a more free country than it actually is?

That was what my post was about, his babbeling is a straw man if anything is a straw man, how much do you want to bet he'll NEVER admit that though?

Vic seems to think that he's intellectually superior but all he is is intellectually dishonest.

How about you STFU with your whining and address why "Wild West" Wyoming has a lower murder rate than your precious Britain, eh?

My preeeecious?

Oh, well it has 10x the murder rate of the Falkland Islands, doesn't it?

You want to play that game then let me remind you that a fair share of the commonwealth can be picked apart into very small pieces.

I didn't do that originally because i thought we were comparing nations, not areas of nations.

Once again, the US is a nation of nations. We have a few states nearly as populous and economically powerful as Britain.
I was making comparisons to US states directly comparable to EU countries, i.e. Oregon to Finland, etc. You ignored all that.

I ignored it and presented you with the reason why, you can't bring a gun into Finland from any other EU country that allows free sale of guns, you CAN bring a gun into Oregon from a neighbouring state without anyone even having the right to check.

Look vic, i've got nothing against you and this seems to be turning into a personal discussion where we are both getting more and more irritated at eachother, so let's fuck it, i'm going to have a Laphroaig (yeah, i only get to drink one) and relax, drink up!

Jake

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

Uh... yes. It's true in pretty much ever state. This is what they refer to as "the gun show loophole." Face to face transfers between individuals not involving a federal firearm dealer.

And only 4 or 5 states register guns, IIRC, and have fairly strict gun laws. As a result, few people in those states own guns, and ~90% of the guns in America are not registered. You referenced giving your contact information when you buy a gun. You know it's illegal for the government to collect that information from the dealers, right? I held an FFL for years. You destroy your 4473s (the form used to sell any title I firearm) after 10 years. The government doesn't have copies, or any of the information from the forms.

When the dealer calls in to NICS (National Instant Check System) a person's identifying information (name, or social is optional) and the type of firearm to be transfered is given (long gun or handgun.) The exact make of the gun, nor quantity of guns being sold are disclosed.

So as I said, about 90% of the guns estimated to be in the US are unregistered. They're sold through face to face transfers every day, on Craigslist, on AR15.com, even on AT's for sale and trade section.

The best they could do is look at people who do have registered weapons in the states that require it, as well as the people who have registered Title II weapons (machine guns, silencers, grenade launchers, artillery, mortars, etc) and the people with concealed handgun licenses (if the states would willingly give up those lists.) Then they can go door to door with SWAT teams trying to collect guns. A lot of people will say they lost them in a boating accident, or sold them years ago. Are you going to say that their prior registration or concealed handgun license is probable cause to search their house? Because then you're trampling a whole new part of the bill of rights. And then there's the people who valiantly stand up and say, if you want these guns, you can have the bullets first. And if even 2% of gun owners had that reaction, the plan would fail. There aren't enough police officers (let alone those willing to take part in this) and once they started dying by the dozens (you do know your grandpas deer rifle from 1936 will blow through police body armor like it isn't even there, right?) the plan will be abandoned because no cop wants to die trying to take away someone's innanimate object.

You clearly know very little about guns, or how they work, or they're obtained or used. I've carried a gun every day for about 15 years, and never gone on a killing spree. I've stopped numerous assaults in progress, and saved my own life twice. Most people in the world are good guys. A few are bad guys. If everyone has guns, the good guys win. If you ban guns, the bad guys still have them, and the good guys are hosed.

For years I've slept with a weapon (used to be an M4, now a PS90) next to my bed loaded with AP (armor piercing) ammunition, because I've always figured that it's just as likely for the bad guys coming through my front door to be wearing body armor with three letters on it as it is for them to be street criminals. And if you think I'd have even a moment's hesitation dropping the hammer on either of them, you're dead wrong. From my cold dead hands.

Are you willing to have me killed because I won't give up my guns? Why don't you come take it yourself then?

Paranoia... you're doing it right.

Really? I'm paranoid? Just like someone who buys insurance, eh? I just came back from a couple hours at the dog park with my dogs. I had a great time, chatted with 10 or 15 other people as the dogs played, then stopped by the grocery store on the way home. My H&K USP Compact was with me the entire time, and yet I didn't even think about it once. In fact, my cell phone was more of a bother to me than my gun was.

Yeah, i think you are paranoid and a litte cuckoo on top of that, to top it off you have the WORST taste in guns.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: Nebor

A Police Chief moved out of his house in London because kids were hanging out on his wall, and he was afraid to confront them. Family men, fathers are being KICKED TO DEATH every week in England for confronting these "yobs." All you have to do is google "yobs" and you'll find thousands of stories of people being victimized, robbed, raped and brutalized on the streets of England with NO recourse. Look at the various policemen's blogs, and you'll hear them saying crime has never been worse in England, and that if they, the police, lay hands on a yob, they are severely disciplined and seen as a rogue vigilante cop. Your Home Secretary just came out and said that she wouldn't walk the streets of London at night because they aren't safe, and that no one should need to! All the while your politicians are guarded by men with guns, while the average person on the street is left to fend for themselves with nothing but their fists, and if they actually take on some yobs and win, they'll be carted off to jail for assault.

So maybe England's murder rate is lower. But are you familiar with the phrase, "I'd rather die a free man than live as a slave?" The people of England have become slaves. Slaves to their own government, that's selling them out to immigrants, and slaves to criminals who do as they wish without fear of retribution. So yeah, they aren't killed as much as us. But I'd rather die in a shootout with a mugger than get my ass kicked by that same mugger, then cower in the corner till he came back to give me another dose. Who wants to live like that? Not me, and apparently not the English, since their emigration rate (leaving) is skyrocketing lately.

You just don't understand their culture. The Queen will take care of them. You don't need rights when you have a Queen.

Shut up or i'll have you sent to the Haag court!

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: punchkin

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: punchkin
AFAIK, even in Texas you have to give your contact information when you buy a weapon. Here in Massachusetts, you have to give your contact information etc., there's a waiting period while they run record checks, you have to get the police chief in your town or his agent to sign off on the application, etc. I'm not sure how they track it if you sell to someone else, but I could find out.

*Jackbooted thug knocks at front door*

Jackbooted Thug: Sir, we have your name on this list of gun owners. Surrender these weapons immediately.

Law Abiding Citizen: I sold those guns years ago in a private sale. Don't know the buyer's name, I sold them on craigslist and he paid cash. Now go away.

Hmm, so in Texas you can sell guns for cash, keep no records and be a "law abiding citizen"? Is that literally true?

Uh... yes. It's true in pretty much ever state. This is what they refer to as "the gun show loophole." Face to face transfers between individuals not involving a federal firearm dealer.

And only 4 or 5 states register guns, IIRC, and have fairly strict gun laws. As a result, few people in those states own guns, and ~90% of the guns in America are not registered. You referenced giving your contact information when you buy a gun. You know it's illegal for the government to collect that information from the dealers, right? I held an FFL for years. You destroy your 4473s (the form used to sell any title I firearm) after 10 years. The government doesn't have copies, or any of the information from the forms.

When the dealer calls in to NICS (National Instant Check System) a person's identifying information (name, or social is optional) and the type of firearm to be transfered is given (long gun or handgun.) The exact make of the gun, nor quantity of guns being sold are disclosed.

So as I said, about 90% of the guns estimated to be in the US are unregistered. They're sold through face to face transfers every day, on Craigslist, on AR15.com, even on AT's for sale and trade section.

The best they could do is look at people who do have registered weapons in the states that require it, as well as the people who have registered Title II weapons (machine guns, silencers, grenade launchers, artillery, mortars, etc) and the people with concealed handgun licenses (if the states would willingly give up those lists.) Then they can go door to door with SWAT teams trying to collect guns. A lot of people will say they lost them in a boating accident, or sold them years ago. Are you going to say that their prior registration or concealed handgun license is probable cause to search their house? Because then you're trampling a whole new part of the bill of rights. And then there's the people who valiantly stand up and say, if you want these guns, you can have the bullets first. And if even 2% of gun owners had that reaction, the plan would fail. There aren't enough police officers (let alone those willing to take part in this) and once they started dying by the dozens (you do know your grandpas deer rifle from 1936 will blow through police body armor like it isn't even there, right?) the plan will be abandoned because no cop wants to die trying to take away someone's innanimate object.

You clearly know very little about guns, or how they work, or they're obtained or used. I've carried a gun every day for about 15 years, and never gone on a killing spree. I've stopped numerous assaults in progress, and saved my own life twice. Most people in the world are good guys. A few are bad guys. If everyone has guns, the good guys win. If you ban guns, the bad guys still have them, and the good guys are hosed.

For years I've slept with a weapon (used to be an M4, now a PS90) next to my bed loaded with AP (armor piercing) ammunition, because I've always figured that it's just as likely for the bad guys coming through my front door to be wearing body armor with three letters on it as it is for them to be street criminals. And if you think I'd have even a moment's hesitation dropping the hammer on either of them, you're dead wrong. From my cold dead hands.

Are you willing to have me killed because I won't give up my guns? Why don't you come take it yourself then?

Paranoia... you're doing it right.

Really? I'm paranoid? Just like someone who buys insurance, eh? I just came back from a couple hours at the dog park with my dogs. I had a great time, chatted with 10 or 15 other people as the dogs played, then stopped by the grocery store on the way home. My H&K USP Compact was with me the entire time, and yet I didn't even think about it once. In fact, my cell phone was more of a bother to me than my gun was.

Yeah, i think you are paranoid and a litte cuckoo on top of that, to top it off you have the WORST taste in guns.

Sorry, I don't know what kind of gun to buy to achieve your incredible .09 MOA accuracy at 800 meters. Oh right, a made up, imaginary, bullshit gun! But you can only get those if you're in the SAS and live in the UK. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[Vic]

I'll have an extra one for you :beer: