Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-08-2012, 10:58 AM
ccmc ccmc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,684
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
As 2A supporters, we need to be honest, and acknowledge there is unfortunately not enough research or data to assert that armed neighborhoods are safer than unarmed ones, or that the rate of LTCs has a deterrent effect. Just not enough data, not enough scientific research, and way too many other factors at play. Lott's research is impressive but also controversial. Correlation and causation are two different things.

However, I know this: gun control doesn't work.

Like many on this board, I come from a country where there is strict gun control - France. Like a lot of those countries, strict gun control was imposed after World War 2, when civilians were ordered to surrender or register certain classes of firearms. Even among resistants, a lot of people didn't want to bother with paperwork, and sometimes chose to give away whatever rifle they had gotten parachuted over, or pistols stolen from the Germans. I suppose at the time, it was a way for some people to turn the page. They didn't see the value in it.

Getting a shotgun in France is easy if you have a hunter's license (and there are a lot of French households with legally owned shotguns, or old shotguns who have been handed from one generation to the next, and are often not registered - ask me how I know). Getting centerfire rifles or handguns is a lot more paperwork, and requires a license, membership with a club validating your permit everytime you shoot, and so on (that said, ironically, I know French people who legally own full auto ARs).

Now, for a very long time, the truth is that gun control actually did work in France, in the sense that there was very little violent crimes compared to the US. And very few gun-related deaths. The crime rate is higher for petty crimes, but much lower for murder, armed robbery, and so on.

So an argument could be made that in those countries, gun control worked. Guns were very difficult for criminals to obtain, making it harder to commit violent crimes.

But things quickly changed when the Iron Curtain fell. I remember going to Romania in January of 1990 and meeting soldiers trying to sell their AKs (for ridiculously high prices, BTW).

And a lot of Eastern European countries have now joined the EU, making it easy to truck merchandise from one end of the continent to the other.

The result? Some gangs in Western Europe now have relatively easy access to AKs. The Arab Spring will no doubt also facilitate the smuggling of more illegal guns from the Middle East and Northern Africa to Europe.

There are also a lot of militaria collectors in Europe who regularly break the law to get some items that are regulated or prohibited.

Now the bad guys over there have fire superiority. But even if getting a shotgun is still within reach for the average citizen, getting access to any other kind of weapon is very difficult. And forget about LTCs.

Things are changing in some countries. The firearm legislation in France is under review and some legislators are pushing for less paperwork and making it easier for law-abiding citizens to acquire them. Not sure if that will happen under the current government, but it could happen within years.

Now some of my friends in Europe (or antis in the US) sometimes tell me "Well you're acknowledging that gun control regulation did work in Europe, so why are you opposed to it here?"

And to me the answer is obvious and twofold:

1. The RKBA is in the US Constitution. Period. It's not in those other countries. Which is why, by the way, I don't like it when people transpose US issues to other countries, and vice-versa. It is a fundamental American right.

2. Historically, this country has been built with guns. It doesn't matter if you're Howard Zinn or Burton W. Folsom Jr., all historians will agree that they played a huge role in building this country. There are hundreds of millions of them. There is no way you can have gun control in this country on an even practical level. So deal with it.

To me, that settles it. I don't need any argument dealing with crime vs. gun control. It doesn't matter. There are plenty of very safe neighborhoods, some where everybody's got a gun (legally), and others where almost nobody does. And there are plenty of crappy neighborhoods where people can carry legally, or where gun control is very strict. It's not the legislation that really has an impact here, it's other factors: unemployment, poverty, education, population make-up, lack of LE, lack of services, etc.

If you start using statistics to make that point, the other camp will have just as many to throw at you. You're not going to convince them.

Just tell them this: there already are plenty of guns out there. Some in the hands of criminals (the minority), and most in the hands of law-abiding citizens. There is no way any amount of gun control is going to make a difference. You want less crime? Work on what causes crime. Hint: it's not guns.

Rant over. Back to work.
You and I have had differing POVs on a few things here, but this is a most excellent post.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-08-2012, 11:22 AM
radioburning's Avatar
radioburning radioburning is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Beach, Strong Beach, Tha LBC, Wrong Beach, Wass Yo Name Foo?
Posts: 4,805
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
I actually doubt that. Most, if not all guns are registered in Sweden. Not in the US. There are millions and millions of unregistered shotguns, rifles, pistols and BP firearms that are not registered and therefore uncountable. Those statistics are therefore skewed.

I am convinced there are far more guns per capita in the US than in Sweden. But that doesn't change anything anyway. This Swedish tragedy was an outlier, an anomaly. It can't be used by either side to make a point.
Actually, you're right. I meant to say Sweden has more registered machine guns per capita than the U.S.

P.S. I didnt Sweden had the mass shooting, that was Norway.
__________________

Vote for pro-gun candidates, or lose your rights, and the rights of future generations. That's it. The end.

"No one said life would be easy".
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-08-2012, 1:40 PM
steve91104's Avatar
steve91104 steve91104 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 2,700
iTrader: 20 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie3888 View Post
I'm writing a paper about how I believe stricter gun laws will not reduce the number of homicides in United States.

It's an argumentative paper.

I need help on key points and maybe some links to articles where they discuss this subject.

The key points I already have.
1. Not constitutional
2. Only law abiding citizens will follow the law.
3.

I just need a couple more

Thanks
IMHO, you should leave point #1 out of your paper. I don't think the constitutionality of the laws is relevant to whether they will reduce crime.

There's an analogy that's been posted on this site, that making gun laws stricter to reduce crime is like trying to stop people from speeding through a 25mph zone at 70 mph by lowering the speed limit to 15 mph. All it does is make life difficult for law abiding citizens.

Last edited by steve91104; 11-08-2012 at 1:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-08-2012, 1:46 PM
ElvenSoul's Avatar
ElvenSoul ElvenSoul is offline
Free at Last!
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 14,451
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

How about expensive! Canada has found the cost outweigh any benefit. They have given up on gun registration.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-08-2012, 1:47 PM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 8,022
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvenSoul View Post
How about expensive! Canada has found the cost outweigh any benefit. They have given up on gun registration.
If they abandon gun registration and restriction, it's added to the list of locations I might consider moving to.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-09-2012, 6:27 AM
CDFingers CDFingers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 1,853
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Strict gun laws will do nothing to affect the homicide rate because criminals don't obey laws.

CDFingers
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-09-2012, 6:32 AM
ldivinag's Avatar
ldivinag ldivinag is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: N37 33* W122 3*
Posts: 4,868
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali-Shooter View Post
Icicles would be the perfect assassination weapons. Or knives made of ice.
or bullets made from frozen meat...



on a more serious note, JOHN LOTT gave a talk about his book MORE GUNS LESS CRIMES at my former work:
http://www.cbe.csueastbay.edu/econ/w..._10_13_sc.html

its a "streaming" video.
__________________
leo d.

Last edited by ldivinag; 11-09-2012 at 6:36 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-09-2012, 7:02 AM
javalos's Avatar
javalos javalos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Valley Springs, CA
Posts: 830
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

We've had gun control for decades, not years, but decades and it has shown itself to be a total failure for every act of illegal and criminal gun play. Chew on that.
__________________
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
__________________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-09-2012, 7:15 AM
the86d's Avatar
the86d the86d is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Pinko-occupied ObamaDerkaderkastan
Posts: 5,595
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

__________________
"That's what governments are for - get in a man's way." - Captain Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-09-2012, 7:24 AM
Big-Bob Big-Bob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Fallbrook/San Luis Obispo.
Posts: 205
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I had to do a class debate on this same topic this semester. I hope your not assigned the "taking sides" book it is horrible.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 11-09-2012, 7:44 AM
the86d's Avatar
the86d the86d is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Pinko-occupied ObamaDerkaderkastan
Posts: 5,595
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFingers View Post
Strict gun laws will do nothing to affect the homicide rate because criminals don't obey laws.

CDFingers
Actually, homicide rates go UP when a ban goes into effect. Criminals are not afraid of a B&E charge like they are afraid of an armed homeowner.

I love this:


Gun control DOES NOT reduce crime, and sites some cases where a shooter was subdued:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH7tR...eature=related
__________________
"That's what governments are for - get in a man's way." - Captain Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds

Last edited by the86d; 11-09-2012 at 7:57 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 11-09-2012, 10:21 AM
Fellblade Fellblade is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 138
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by radioburning View Post
The largest mass shooting in modern history happened in a country with strict gun control. Columbine happened during the AWB. Sweden has more guns per capita than the U.S., but a far lower homicide rate. England banned guns in 1997, they still have gun crime, and now you're much more likely to be stabbed there.
I saw a new article yesterday where in England, some criminals wielding axes and bats rode into a mall on motorcycles and robbed stores. If the English had access to firearms I have no doubt these guys would have had guns, but the lack of guns did nothing to stop this crime.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 11-09-2012, 3:48 PM
hvengel hvengel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 440
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesa Tactical View Post
The only way to answer this empirically is to compare homicide rates in a country before and after guns were outlawed. What this will reveal, I believe, is that places like the UK, where everyone knows they have a lower homicide rate than the US (presumably because they have strict gun control), always had a lower homicide rate than the US, even when guns were legally available there.

What you want to do is compare homicide rates before and after gun control was enacted.

...
This is correct but it ignores another approach. Demographics is a huge factor in homicide rates. For example we "know" that the US has higher homicide rates than Canada. But this ignores demographics since even in the US there are huge differences in homicide rates for different demographic groups. For example black males commit over 1/2 of all homicides in the US but are only about 6% of the population. IE. Black males commit homicides at about 8 times the rate of the general population.

In the US we have a much larger minority population than Canada and it can be argued that this accounts for much if not all the difference in homicide rates. I have read (Lott I think but this would need to be verified) that if you take the states that that border Canada that those states will have a demographic profile that is almost identical to Canada. If you compare homicide rates for these boarder states to Canada they are actually slightly lower than Canada but I don't think the difference is statistically significant. If the demographically adjusted homicide rate in the US is basically the same as in Canada with it's much stricter gun laws then perhaps this shows that these gun laws do not have a significant impact on homicide rates. I should add that most of the states that boarder Canada are more or less "free" states that have less restrictive gun laws. IE. Montana, Washington, Idaho, N Dak. and so on with a few exceptions like New York.

As an aside the high homicide rate committed by black males is a very sad thing. But it points to how the anti's ignore a very real issue when they go after guns but totally discount that some thing is very wrong in the black community. If we instead focused on that issue and tried to correct the under laying problems instead of focusing on gun control we might actually be able to make real progress on dealing with our countries violence issue.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 11-09-2012, 10:28 PM
dirty_530's Avatar
dirty_530 dirty_530 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Lake Tahoe
Posts: 1,700
iTrader: 30 / 100%
Default

No...end thread
__________________
You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one.

- Rush Limbaugh
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 11-10-2012, 7:05 AM
donw's Avatar
donw donw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: between temecula and palm springs
Posts: 1,631
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

logic, facts, figures and stastics have little affect on legislators...emotion is what drives the passage of almost any gun related legislation.

IMO... "NO" is the answer...
__________________
NRA life member, US Army Veteran

i am a legend in my own mind...

we are told not to judge muslims by what a few do...yet, the NRA membership and firearms owners are ALL considered as radical...

"The second amendment ain't about your deer rifle..."
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 11-12-2012, 7:45 AM
Wherryj's Avatar
Wherryj Wherryj is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,718
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie3888 View Post
I'm writing a paper about how I believe stricter gun laws will not reduce the number of homicides in United States.

It's an argumentative paper.

I need help on key points and maybe some links to articles where they discuss this subject.

The key points I already have.
1. Not constitutional
2. Only law abiding citizens will follow the law.
3.

I just need a couple more

Thanks
Sure it will! Look how well it has worked for NYC, Chicago, LA, Mexico and the UK! Oh, wait, their gun violence is at an all time high...

At least strict gun laws have kept the US government from running guns to drug cartels. Oh, wait...
__________________
"What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean?"
"The cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites."
-Anton Scalia, Supreme Court Justice
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 11-12-2012, 9:57 PM
The Geologist's Avatar
The Geologist The Geologist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Turlock, CA
Posts: 630
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

No!!!!

A criminal will get a gun regardless of any anti-gun law. Why would a criminal care if about violating a gun law? Just look at the amount of crime present in the anti-gun places.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 11-12-2012, 11:09 PM
stix213's Avatar
stix213 stix213 is offline
AKA: Joe Censored
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Rafael
Posts: 16,493
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Strict gun laws have worked great in Washington DC, Chicago, Oakland, and Mexico, so why not?
__________________
Support my Steam Greenlight campaign for Omega Reaction!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=618002901

Just vote Yes please, not asking for money.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 11-13-2012, 5:57 AM
Tarn_Helm's Avatar
Tarn_Helm Tarn_Helm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,112
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Post Getting iced!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali-Shooter View Post
Icicles would be the perfect assassination weapons. Or knives made of ice.
Guns that shoot icicles!

Yay!

To OP: In order to give your argument some historical grounding so that it is not merely a "current events" paper that fails to show patterns over decades, be sure to cite these:

Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control by Gary Kleck and Don B. Kates (Nov 2001)

The Great American Gun Debate by Don B. Kates, Gary Kleck, James R. Boen and John K. Lattimer (1997)

Firearms and Violence: Issues of Public Policy (Pacific Studies in Public Policy) by Don B. Kates (Jun 1983)

Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out by Don B. Kates (Feb 1979)

and possibly even this, to show that harsh, nationwide prohibitions in a "gun free paradise" have not made it a paradise at all but the opposite: Guns and Violence: The English Experience by Joyce Lee Malcolm
__________________
"The Religion of Peace": Islam: What the West Needs to Know.
". . . all [historical] experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms
[of governmental abuses and usurpations] to which they are accustomed."
Decl. of Indep., July 4, 1776

NRA Benefactor/Life Member; Lifer: CRPA, GOA, SAF & JPFO


Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 11-13-2012, 6:00 AM
Hopalong's Avatar
Hopalong Hopalong is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: CA.
Posts: 2,269
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It's not about reducing homicides, it's about politics.

HELLO!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 11-13-2012, 6:29 AM
The Shadow's Avatar
The Shadow The Shadow is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,213
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Some people just have the will to commit crime. And those people will exist until the end of time. Having said that, then there are those that have no problem murdering another person to get what they want. Firearms are simply one means that they use to do that. What the anti-gun extremists don't get is that banning firearms isn't going to change that.

Anti-gun zealots will attempt some form of logic by suggesting that while people will murder, banning guns will reduce their murderous rampage to just a few individuals if all they have are knives or machetes in which to kill their victims. Apparently they are unaware that people have gone on rampages with cars and just ran people over to commit mass murder. And of course there are the home made WMDs, aka IEDs, that people have manufactured. If a person wants to commit mass murder, they will find a way, but liberals are too narrow minded to get that.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-13-2012, 10:08 AM
Sutcliffe Sutcliffe is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Campbell, CA
Posts: 5,470
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default probably lead to fewer overall deaths

The actual violent crime rate would go up like the United Kingdom though.
Take a look at Jamaica. Firearms for the commoner are verboten and their drug gang fueled murder rate is ten times higher than the United States.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-13-2012, 10:56 AM
kaligaran's Avatar
kaligaran kaligaran is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 4,749
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

The main thing that seems to go down as a trend when gun control is enacted (looking at europe and austrailia) is that GUN suicides go down, not necessarily suicides as a whole. At least this is based on the stats I found when googling.
__________________
WTB: multiautomatic ghost gun with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Must include shoulder thing that goes up. Memberships/Affiliations: CERT, ARRL ARES, NRA Patron Member, HRC, CGN/CGSSA, Cal-FFL
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-13-2012, 11:01 AM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,735
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by donw View Post
logic, facts, figures and stastics have little affect on legislators...emotion is what drives the passage of almost any gun related legislation.
In theory, this is the problem "strict scrutiny" is supposed to solve.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-13-2012, 11:09 AM
phrogg111's Avatar
phrogg111 phrogg111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Folsom
Posts: 709
iTrader: 10 / 92%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie3888 View Post
I'm writing a paper about how I believe stricter gun laws will not reduce the number of homicides in United States.

It's an argumentative paper.
Ok. So, arguments FOR gun control:
1. If people don't have guns, there can be no gun crime!
2. If guns are less easily available, there will be less gun crime!
3. If people don't have guns that easily kill lots of people, they can't easily kill lots of people!
4. Criminals can get guns legally! This needs to stop!

Ok, so to break those down completely, because these things are what liberals actually believe:
1. A gun free-utopia cannot exist. If people don't have guns, there can be no gun crime - you're completely right - but that can never exist in the United States, or, for that matter, anywhere in the world. There's always a way to get a gun, legally or illegally.
2. If guns are less easily available, then the ones that criminals always have, and all of the ones available on the black market, are still just as easily available to criminals. The fact is, criminals already have the guns they need, and if they don't, they can steal them from someone's house. Burglars are the main reason that deadly guns end up on the black market.
3. "Assault weapons" are rarely used in crime. More importantly, the guns doing the most damage are the small handguns that are all over any big city street. You can't conceal an AK-47, nor can you easily find a machine gun for sale. More importantly, even if you took all of the "assault weapons" off of the streets, there's still criminals out there with them. If someone really wants to murder lots of people, they'll find a way. Heck, even when guns are effectively removed from the streets, people still find a way. In China, people go on mass knife/hatchet murder sprees. Gun control, the likes of which to work in America, would have had to have been controlled for about 100 years already. Anyway,
4. Criminals can get guns legally? Are you kidding me? Many crimes have temporary bans on gun ownership - like 5-10 years - and any felony, or any domestic violence incident, or any restraining order against you immediately takes your gun rights away. Until you've proven that there's a reason why your rights from the bill of rights need to be taken away for the good of society, and until that's been proven in court, then you have them - that's all there is to it.

Here's the thing. Any criminal who wants a gun, can get one. If we ban guns? Well, I made a gun in my garage, using under $400 worth of tooling, under $500 worth of parts, with NO experience. I used a block of plastic - Delrin - and AR parts that I bought online. It was legal for me to do so, which is why I did it, but even if it wasn't legal for me to do so, I still could have done it. It wasn't even particularly hard to build a single shot pistol that shoots rifle rounds.

If I can build a gun in my garage easily - and I have - then criminals can too. This means that criminals will ALWAYS BE ARMED.

If criminals will always be armed, why would you take away my rights, provided to me in the bill of rights, to make sure that I can defend myself against criminals? If I'm unarmed, and a criminal with a gun picks a fight with me, they will win. There's no maybe. I will walk away losing what they want me to lose... Or I won't walk away at all.

That's not good enough.

I'll keep my rights. I've proven I can build a gun in my garage. If you ban guns, I'll still have them, just like anyone who would want to hurt me.
__________________
Hunting is a loophole in the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

There is no privilege to keep and bear arms.

Arms are for killing people. All other uses of an arm are illegitimate uses.

Know your rights. When stopped by police and not doing anything wrong, tell them you don't consent to searches. They are allowed to lie to you, but you're not allowed to lie to them. Just say nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-13-2012, 11:31 AM
kcjr1125's Avatar
kcjr1125 kcjr1125 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,885
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClarenceBoddicker View Post
Guns & homicides from bullets have nothing to do with each other. Criminals commit crimes not tools. America has a societal problem, not a gun problem. In fact America needs more guns not less. America's societal problems can be traced to TV & the public school systems, which are both the responsibility of parents. Parents are failing their kids & our society. Criminals are rewarded & citizens are punished in the US. Follow the money & all shall become clear.
well said.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-13-2012, 11:41 AM
Wiz-of-Awd Wiz-of-Awd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Where I'm at ;)
Posts: 2,220
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hvengel View Post
...If we instead focused on that issue and tried to correct the under laying problems instead of focusing on gun control we might actually be able to make real progress on dealing with our countries violence issue.
Yes.

A fundamental problem throughout the country on many different issues.
We are a society Hell bent on addressing the "results" of social issues, but not interested in addressing the causes.

"Too much work" probably, and an all too common feeling of "not my responsibility."

A.W.D.
__________________
Quote:
In the end, time and irony always win.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-14-2012, 11:08 AM
big red big red is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 482
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

california proves that theory wrong as does Chicago. Strict gun laws only deprive the law biding of a way to defend themselves and the stats show it.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-05-2012, 1:22 PM
richie3888's Avatar
richie3888 richie3888 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Pablo, CA
Posts: 803
iTrader: 30 / 100%
Default

thanks guys for the input
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-05-2012, 1:27 PM
BHPFan's Avatar
BHPFan BHPFan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Where they tax you on everything and give you the shaft.
Posts: 2,278
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFingers View Post
Strict gun laws will do nothing to affect the homicide rate because criminals don't obey laws.

CDFingers
True.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 12-05-2012, 5:43 PM
dunndeal's Avatar
dunndeal dunndeal is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,233
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

In the Greater Johannesburg area in South Africa there are 6 million people, about the same population as the Greater Bay Area. I don't know how many murders there are per year in the GBA, less than 750 I'd think. In Jo-berg there are 5000. Because handguns are very difficult to acquire,,, the preferred tool of murder is the machete.

Thanks but no thanks. I'd rather take two rounds to center mass rather than two dozen hacks to everywhere.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 12-05-2012, 6:56 PM
JoeJinKY JoeJinKY is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 851
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

What stops you car at an intersection? The stop sign, or your willing compliance with the action it represents?

Last edited by JoeJinKY; 12-05-2012 at 7:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 12-06-2012, 4:36 AM
CDFingers CDFingers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 1,853
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

It's always good to have some facts. This link takes us to the history of California's crime rate between 1960 and 2011:

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm

I got my first gun in 1961.

Instructive for intrepid data miners...

CDFingers

Last edited by CDFingers; 12-06-2012 at 4:37 AM.. Reason: added words of happiness
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 12-06-2012, 9:06 AM
Nick Justice's Avatar
Nick Justice Nick Justice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 1,912
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

See if gun control is working in Mexico.
__________________
It doesn't matter how scary, ugly, uncomfortable, or inconvenient self defense can be. Like it or not, you will never, ever be relieved of your duty and responsibility to defend your life, your family, your country and your freedom.

How much ammo do I need? Enough to last me the rest of my life, and then lot more for later.

The government does not come knocking at your door. It comes knocking down your door.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 12-07-2012, 1:58 AM
stingray4540's Avatar
stingray4540 stingray4540 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Bay Area
Posts: 434
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Didn't read all the posts so sorry if someone already stated this.

I think you are arguing from the wrong angle.

1. You shouldn't argue that "gun control doesn't work."

The problem, is that in some cases it does work, and the other side of the argument will point out countries that do ok with strict gun control. In a debate, you've just been defeated on that point IMO. Also, you can't PROVE your argument, only make a conjecture.

2. You should be arguing that "more guns don't = more crime."

With this approach you can point out all the states and counties that do issue LTC. Then you can show crime stats and show that there has never been an increase in gun crime and violence after the onset of LTC policies. You can also point to other countries like Switzerland where all men are members of the militia and keep FULL AUTO rifles in there HOME. What's there crime rate look like compared to Great Britain?
Then you can move on to point out how some countries have enacted stricter gun laws and crime/murder rates rose. In this case, it's easier to concede that yes indeed sometimes gun bans work, but just as often they don't. On the other hand, allowing lawfull citizens access to firearms has never increased crime rates.

In either case, be prepared for the counter arguments. They are usually the same, but all of these can be proven not to be true with some facts.

Here's a couple links that might help:
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-fa...6_1_screen.pdf

Death by guns vs cars @ 1:20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tku8Y...ayer_embedded#!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/0...cond-Amendment



Be smart, make sure that your argument can't be defeated. Don't ever make an argument that can be countered with facts, then you just look like them. That's a mistake a lot of people make, I even see it a lot on the forum. People make the wrong argument, or approach from the wrong angle and get backed into a corner.
__________________
Quote:
“Thoſe who would give up Essential Liberty to purchaſe a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” - An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania (1759)

Last edited by stingray4540; 12-07-2012 at 2:02 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:33 AM
MOA1 MOA1 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: AV
Posts: 85
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Human violence.

It matters not the tool of violence, it matters the tool of justice, the gun. The gun is the equalizer. It affords the 5'1" person the stature of a 7'2" adult. It is and always will be an equalizer.

God made man, Samuel Colt made them equal.

How could any liberal want anything less.
__________________
"one test is worth a thousand opinions".

Last edited by MOA1; 12-07-2012 at 2:37 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:38 AM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by POLICESTATE View Post
Look at homicide rates per capita in countries that do not allow private ownership of firearms. If people can't shoot each other they will club/stab/chop/choke/drown/beat/whatever each other to death.

Personally I think a firearm is a poor tool for homicide, too loud and leaves too much forensic evidence.
I think you may be confusing homicide with murder; there is justifiable homicide, as in self defense!
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:59 AM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by d4v0s View Post
Often times in argumentative papers, its a good idea to include alternate solutions.

What do my fellow calgunners think would actually deter crime?

My ideas
-Death penalty for crimes commited with guns (exceptions for lawful self defense) as in felony assault with a weapon, robbery, etc...

-Statewide shall-issue CCW with national reciprocity, with a 10 year prison sentence for anyone caught with a gun and no CCW. (exceptions for travel, and securing firearms misunderstandings...big difference between a gun in its case unlocked, and one on a KKK members belt or in his glove box loaded.)

-Must register your weapons if you live in high crime areas. dont like it, move out.
Murder is murder, whether committed with bare hands, a rock, a gun, a 10,000lb bomb, or the jawbone of an ***. All these stupid ‘firearms enhancements’ are just pits and snares to entrap the common man and make him fearful of exercising his rights; least some minor transgression blow up into a 10 or 20 year sentence simply because he happened to have a gun in his pocket.
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 12-07-2012, 3:11 AM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redcliff View Post
They should pass a law making suicide illegal and then we'd automatically reduce gun deaths in America by 50%.

Oh wait, suicide is already illegal. Maybe we should pass another law making suicide by gun "double illegal". Yeah, that will fix it....

Gun violence in America is a societal problem, not an inanimate object problem or a law problem. Too many untreated and ignored mentally disturbed people, too many children without good role models, too many homes with no one available to teach kids right and wrong and to discipline them and teach them actions have consequences.
No, No No, You have it all wrong. If you kill yourself with a gun you should get the death penalty. That way they will have to resurrect you and put you on death row with your own carpet and curtains, TV, and internet. And you can die of old age while the state pays for endless appeals.
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 12-07-2012, 7:46 AM
HBrebel's Avatar
HBrebel HBrebel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: HB
Posts: 543
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

It';s already proven that it won't
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 7:13 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.