439 replies to this topic

[WoIverine]

I love how the media runs wild with these massacre stories, yet barely anything is mentioned when someone uses a gun to protect themself, or someone else for a legitimate reason, agenda much?

[questionmark]

Bavarian Raven, on 04 January 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

Is that why gun crimes have near doubled in britain since the near ban was put in place ages ago?

Not quite right, gun violence decreased, knife violence slightly increased and the rest is due to the fact that most brawls were somebody gets a bloody nose is counted as extreme violence by laws.

But still, overall the violent crimes are receding since 1995:


More data on this BBC article

and it is not only violent crime that is decreasing but all except drug offenses is.

So, the less guns more violence thingy, at, least for the United Kingdom, is not factual. Whether it has anything to do with the gun ban is inconclusive as the ban started in 96 and the downward trends in crime in 95.

That there is more gun crime is a urban legend, created by the fact that having a gun is a gun crime in Britain now, but that is not relevant to the gun violence.

Edited by questionmark, 04 January 2013 - 03:59 PM.

[aztek]

FBI: Hammers, Clubs Kill More People Than Rifles, Shotguns


http://www.fbi.gov/a...e-data-table-11


“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here,” Feinstein told MRC-TV in a 1995 interview.

this time he might have enough votes, and they WILL take all your guns, that they see fit, today.
and than tomorrow they will vote for a law that will take the rest.

only incredibly stupid ppl believe in good will of the gvmnt.

Edited by aztek, 04 January 2013 - 06:07 PM.

[WoIverine]

Kind of speaks for itself.

Edited by WoIverine, 04 January 2013 - 07:02 PM.

[questionmark]

Take a good look at his eyes and what he seez around 7:10.

He can do it, but can you?

[WoIverine]

questionmark, on 04 January 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

Take a good look at his eyes and what he seez around 7:10.

He can do it, but can you?

Unfortunately, I can't get any audio right now, but I remembered the video and reposted it. I'm not sure what he's saying in the interview at 7:10.

[questionmark]

WoIverine, on 04 January 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Unfortunately, I can't get any audio right now, but I remembered the video and reposted it. I'm not sure what he's saying in the interview at 7:10.

Basically that he is able to shoot somebody but that he did not like his neighbors getting armed because he was not sure they could.

[aztek]

he says you need a lot of training to do what he did, just having a gun wont do much.

[aztek]

Br Cornelius, on 04 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

You are wrong again - the evidence points to guns having no impact on rape figures. It that simple.

Br Cornelius

sure.
look at Australia example, 3x the rapes. explain that.

[HerNibs]

aztek, on 04 January 2013 - 08:17 PM, said:

he says you need a lot of training to do what he did, just having a gun wont do much.

Right.  Training.  Something that ISN'T required to own or use a weapon.

But should be.

Nibs

[questionmark]

HerNibs, on 04 January 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

Right.  Training.  Something that ISN'T required to own or use a weapon.

But should be.

Nibs

Ah but the second amendment seez that every idiot can have a gun and shoot his foot so we have a well organized militia!

[HerNibs]

questionmark, on 04 January 2013 - 08:22 PM, said:

Ah but the second amendment seez that every idiot can have a gun and shoot his foot so we have a well organized militia!

*lol*  If only "Darwin's law" kicked in more often.

Nibs

[WoIverine]

Ahh, I see. Lance was pretty meticulous about his methods, organizing his shop so that he would have convenient access to his weapons, if needed. He spent a lot of time at the range, and took a few classes I believe as well. He is correct though, his neighbors may have just bought a gun and then possibly would not have done any of the other preparedness things that he did, which would endanger their lives. He did end up getting shot 5 times as well by criminals. Anyone who has purchased a firearm needs to at least put in some time at a range and learn to use what they've acquired.

Edited by WoIverine, 04 January 2013 - 08:30 PM.

[aztek]

HerNibs, on 04 January 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

Right.  Training.  Something that ISN'T required to own or use a weapon.

But should be.

Nibs

i agree, i would not mind if we had laws that would require you to pass yearly test to for ccw. but it isn't the agenda, the agenda is to ban\restrict guns, not to pass laws that require training.

=

[HerNibs]

aztek, on 04 January 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

i agree, i would not mind if we had laws that would require you to pass yearly test to for ccw. but it isn't the agenda, the agenda is to ban\restrict guns, not to pass laws that require training.

=

If done properly the two things would work together.  Regular testing and training done by certified and experienced "teachers".  The resources for people to get better help and monitoring for individuals seeming to suffer from mental issues and a secure (and functional and financed) process to notify authorities of concerns without destroying lives and/or being ignored.

The gummint isn't takin' ar guns.  Not going to happen.  Just a bunch of BS rhetoric will go on and on and on and on...

Extremism from both sides with no one actually working to solve the problem, only garner votes for their party.

Common sense will NOT prevail.

Nibs