Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Still Waters

Obama 'backs assault weapons ban'

441 posts in this topic

The problem is simple. Mental disease and easy access to deadly weapons cause massacres. While both are hard to control, the removing guns is much much easier considering ANYONE is a bad day away from a shooting spree. The question is is it too late to remove guns. I figure we give it a try before arming kids.

ANYONE except the police? Except the military? Now the issue is about age and "arming kids". Are we dizzy yet? How about parental responsibility not coming from Washington DC too?

The problem is not simple. Would you disarm Syrian rebels too because they're a day away from shooting someone? Don't put everyone behind a gun into the same mal-painted box. You'd have our women disarmed in the streets and at the mercy of every rapist alive, armed or not. Pathetic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have our women disarmed in the streets and at the mercy of every rapist alive, armed or not. Pathetic!

Because Australia and the UK are a paradise for rapists....

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Australia and the UK are a paradise for rapists....

No, because the United States isn't a paradise for murder.

I'm all for breaking out the statistics on this stuff. If you want to compare violent crimes across the board, including burglary, then put it up. All these suggestions are made around here about countries without putting out the data. I've shown that the US isn't anywhere close to the top of the list in murders and will probably need to repeat doing that several times before we're all on the same page.

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

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

I'd say that quote is pretty clear.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say it first, SpiritWriter did. But I'll reiterate it, "I have a solution for all the world but nobody wants to listen to me."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, because the United States isn't a paradise for murder.

I'm all for breaking out the statistics on this stuff. If you want to compare violent crimes across the board, including burglary, then put it up. All these suggestions are made around here about countries without putting out the data. I've shown that the US isn't anywhere close to the top of the list in murders and will probably need to repeat doing that several times before we're all on the same page.

http://en.wikipedia....l_homicide_rate

Of comparibly sophisticated countries American is definately top of the list.

You have not made your point in meaningful ways other than comparing America to the likes of Russia and Jamaica. Campared to the UK, America has 4x the homicide rate.

And America is marginally higher in terms of rape than the UK, which disproves the point that gun ownership is a discouragement to rape.

Robbery is fractionally higher in the UK than it is in America.

http://www.civitas.o...oecdjan2012.pdf

You have failed to make your point that guns make you safer and prevent crime.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the point is that all of this talk about "assault weapons" is meaningless given how few are killed by them on an annual basis. Even the government's own numbers showed that the 1994 AWB had zero impact on the rate of violent crime. Which makes perfect sense given how few long guns in general are used in the commission of a crime on an annual basis (more folks are beaten to death annually for example) Violent crime has been on the decrease in the US for decades at the same time that private gun ownership has skyrocketed. So if guns were the causal factor so many claim, it truly would be the Wild West one very street corner in the US. Even mass shootings like we saw in CT happen quite infrequently in the United States. Here are a couple of interesting comparisons:

"Mass shootings are a tiny, tiny problem. Which isn’t to say that they aren’t utterly horrifying in more than one way. People’s lives are destroyed, both literally and figuratively. What I mean to say is that if we were to prioritize our political attention to topics according to how many lives were at stake, mass shootings wouldn’t even be on the radar.

Factoring in the rate of death caused by mass shootings from Columbine to the present (about 210 people in 13 years), it will be more than 300 years until we reach the number of casualties that occur from accidental drownings every single year in this country. In a little more than 150 years from now, we’ll approach the number of people who are poisoned to death every single year in this country. Sometime in 2014 we might surpass the number of people struck by lightning every single year in this country.

Which is to say that mass shootings are incredibly rare and don’t kill a lot of people when they do happen.

It is tempting to ask why accidental drowning is not 340 times more important a social issue than gun control. Or why poisoning isn’t 150 times as pressing a political issue. (If the number of people dying is truly what’s important, almost anything would be more pressing.) The problem is not hard to understand though, and rests in a psychological concept known as the “logical fallacy of misleading vividness”.

The fallacy of misleading vividness is when the thought, imagery or reality of something is so emotionally potent – positively or negatively – that you begin to overestimate the likelihood and frequency of its occurrence. This is why many people are afraid to fly. They can understand intellectually that crashes almost never happen, and that airplanes are statistically the safest way to travel, but the idea of being torn apart mid-air, or knowing that they’re about to die for a full two minutes in freefall, or being dragged under the ocean while stuck inside the cabin is so vivid and disturbing, that they actually experience intense fear about a process that is safer than their drive to the airport.

This is what happens to us collectively as a nation when mass shootings occur. Yes, it is terrible, for both the person who was so disturbed and all the people they harmed. It puts on graphic display the absolute worst aspects of our culture, which is painful to watch.

However, it is also an incredible statistical deviation from the norm, objectively inflicting far less suffering and death than many other ways that people are far more likely to die. This is an important point. When our policy becomes based on emotional content rather than facts, we are heading in the wrong direction."

This is cut from a fantastic blog entry by a self-proclaimed Leftist gun enthusiast. It's long, but I highly recommend it for anyone interested in a less emotionally driven discussion of gun control and the "assault weapons" ban.

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do ppl keep bringing irrelevant UK, and Australia into this??

we are talking about USA. or at least should be.

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was about 85000rapes in usa (only reported ones).

about 16000 in uk, and and about 18000 in australia, in 2010 alone.

i personally don't care about uk and aust. but if we could drop numbers in USA by arming females, even by few it is worth it. hey it could be anyones wife\daughter\sister...

and if Australians and Brits like their women be raped at present rate, it is their businesses.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was about 85000rapes in usa (only reported ones).

about 16000 in uk, and and about 18000 in australia, in 2010 alone.

i personally don't care about uk and aust. but if we could drop numbers in USA by arming females, even by few it is worth it. hey it could be anyones wife\daughter\sister...

and if Australians and Brits like their women be raped at present rate, it is their businesses.

Statistically on a per capita basis Americans having guns has had no effect on the Rape rate - that is the point of comparing with a comparable gunless country like the UK. You may not care - but it is highly relevant to a discussion of do do guns make Americans safer - NO THEY DO NOT according to the evidence, they make you more likely to die from a gunshot wound.

Deny the evidence as much as you like, it seems to be the Republican way.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statistically on a per capita basis Americans having guns has had no effect on the Rape rate -

lol.

that is retarded.

both UK and Australia have HIGHER rape rate than USA.

Australia alone has 3 times the rape rate USA does.

check wiki, UN rape statistics

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.

that is retarded.

both UK and Australia have HIGHER rape rate than USA.

Australia alone has 3 times the rape rate USA does.

check wiki, UN rape statistics

The UK and the USA have almost exactly the same rape rate. By your contention your access to guns should produce significantly reduced rates. I would say the massively higher Australian rate is culturally driven and has nothing to do with guns.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK and the USA have almost exactly the same rape rate. By your contention your access to guns should produce significantly reduced rates. I would say the massively higher Australian rate is culturally driven and has nothing to do with guns.

Br Cornelius

I would not say culturally but would put it down to a high male/female imbalance. Australia always had many more men than women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't care what it has to do with, and i don't care what you would say or not.

fact is, if you try to rape someone that is armed you have a lot more chances to get shot than if is she was not armed. and being armed she has a lot more chances not to get raped. that is a fact. we have posters here that prove it with their personal experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not say culturally but would put it down to a high male/female imbalance. Australia always had many more men than women.

They are also a hard drinking culture which always increases all forms of civil violence statistics.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't care what it has to do with, and i don't care what you would say or not.

fact is, if you try to rape someone that is armed you have a lot more chances to get shot than if is she was not armed. and being armed she has a lot more chances not to get raped. that is a fact. we have posters here that prove it with their personal experience.

Show us why the UK and USA are almost exactly the same then - stop repeating a meaningless statement which is not supported by the evidence.

The only explanation which fits your statement is that the American male has a much higher propensity to commit rape and the guns are actually holding the figures down. Personally I don't believe that to be the case.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not just Obama you need to watch out for. I hope you all know what green lights are for and are wearing your seat belts when driving. Because your next.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50350330/ns/local_news-chicago_il/t/ill-senate-committee-passes-gun-restrictions/#.UOXfancbBp5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, ratos my a.. s another wet fantasy.

read statistics

1.00\1,03\1,03

seems pretty close to me.

http://en.wikipedia....es_by_sex_ratio

Show us why the UK and USA are almost exactly the same then - stop repeating a meaningless statement which is not supported by the evidence.

Br Cornelius

lol the evidences right in front of you you choose to ignore it.

i will stop, as soon as you stop bringing irrelevant (any country) into debate about USA.

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, ratos my a.. s another wet fantasy.

read statistics

1.00\1,03\1,03

seems pretty close to me.

http://en.wikipedia....es_by_sex_ratio

lol the evidences right in front of you you choose to ignore it.

lol, ratos my a.. s another wet fantasy.

read statistics

1.00\1,03\1,03

seems pretty close to me.

http://en.wikipedia....es_by_sex_ratio

lol the evidences right in front of you you choose to ignore it.

You have neither a coherent argument or any evidence to support it. Your guns do nothing to stop rape - or you are born rapists. Take your pick.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have neither a coherent argument or any evidence to support it. Your guns do nothing to stop rape - or you are born rapists. Take your pick.

Br Cornelius

that is stupid, you ignore evidence every time it is presented, why would i want to show you anything else.??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at page four in this survey;

http://www.civitas.o...oecdjan2012.pdf

USA rapes per 100,000 are 28.6

UK rapes per 100,000 are 27.7

Br Cornelius

that is stupid, you ignore evidence every time it is presented, why would i want to show you anything else.??

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statistically on a per capita basis Americans having guns has had no effect on the Rape rate - that is the point of comparing with a comparable gunless country like the UK. You may not care - but it is highly relevant to a discussion of do do guns make Americans safer - NO THEY DO NOT according to the evidence, they make you more likely to die from a gunshot wound.

Deny the evidence as much as you like, it seems to be the Republican way.

Br Cornelius

This isn't a Republican/Democrat issue regardless of how much our President and others on the left would like to make it one. There are a lot of Democrats who own guns and are members of the NRA. Just like there are many Republicans who are anti-gun.

Regarding the current discussion between you two, I have to wonder if any of your numbers take into account aborted rapes that are not reported. I'm fairly certain that there's a much higher rate of reporting actual rapes vs aborted rapes where the woman displayed a firearm.

Studies done in the US indicate that upwards of 2 million instances of self defense with firearms go unreported each and every year in the US. See John Lott's work on the subject.

Edited by Rafterman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't a Republican/Democrat issue regardless of how much our President and others on the left would like to make it one.

Its the the denial of evidence I was pointing out - its endemic among conservatives.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, you are ether slow. or you think everyone around is.

UK is england, wales, Ireland, Scotland. COMBINED.

add all those, don't just give me data for england alone, or i'll give you data for state of Vermont alone, and you still loose.

now go tell those females that were not raped cuz they were armed, that their gun would not make any difference. lol

i hope poster (i forgot who she is) that did protect herself with a gun against potential rape, comes and rips you a new one. you really deserve it.

btw, what do reps, have to do with it?? i'm not rep. you assumed, just like pretty much everything else. knee jerk reaction, how typical of you

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, you are ether slow. or you think everyone around is.

UK is england, wales, Ireland, Scotland. COMBINED.

add all those, don't just give me data for england alone, or i'll give you data for state of Vermont alone, and you still loose.

now go tell those females that were not raped cuz they were armed, that their gun would not make any difference. lol

Its per capita which means all numbers are comparable ie normalized to each other - you dumb ass.

The UK drops if you combine them all.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.