Gun totin' fencers

[mango fever]

this is silly. call the nra and tell them how you feel about it. everyone has tried through legislation for gun control, but it' totally out of hand now. one peice of legislation passed in 1995 or 1996, hear this: a guy got on a train in new york with a semi-automatic and shot everyone in the car. the entire city went berserk, they were carrying people out, there was mass panic everyone went totally out of control - (by the way, it was my 5:35 out of Penn Station, but I worked late that night and missed it), anyway, a guy on the train, was shot and crippled, he's in a wheelchair now, he was able to subdue the guy with the gun. he's like a local hero there now, we called him "the slacker" for fun, he bought car-plates that say "slacker" - for real. This guys mother ran for a local government seat on a gun control platform. EVEN THOUGH the incident was fresh in everyone's mind, and all the victims and their families were hysterical SHE ALMOST LOST THE ELECTION by being on the "wrong-side" of the issue. Can you believe it? Take a look at what the kids are doing in junior high schools: they're shooting each other, now, take a look at Legislation: what happens - they STILL insist that control isn't the answer. I disagree with them totally, but, until there are enough of us, we're sort of stuck. And the other issue is: how many guns, there are guys who collect guns that are completely wild, like over 100 guns in a house, with little kids running around it, it's totally berserk, and....the KIND of guns some of these guys have are INCREDIBLE and so on and so on and so on.
Any ideas?

[This message has been edited by mango fever (edited 04-06-2001).]

[This message has been edited by mango fever (edited 04-06-2001).]

[Stryder]

Mango, name one piece of gun legislation that saved a life. I can name a few guns that have done so.
Ask any police officer if he ever prevented a violent crime. I can name a few private citizens who have done so.

The more gun laws we pass the more gun crime we have. I am not saying they are the cause, I am just saying they are not the solution.

One more piece of rhetoric for you. Gun laws do not affect the criminals. All they do is take guns away from the good guys. Every time someone commits a crime, the lib's scream "See. More gun laws would have prevented this!" The NRA responds "That man obtained his gun illegally under current laws." But no one seems to get it.
Bill Clinton outlawed assault weapons based on the premise that they are too dangerous ,serve no sporting purpose, and can be converted to full auto.
Since the first law regarding fully-automatic weapons (1934) there has been exactly ONE crime committed by a legally owned fully-automatic weapon. That was by a police officer. Currently serving 18 years in prison.

Rant? Me? Never.

[Mengarath the Dragon]

I agree completely with Stryder. Guns don't kill people, and we should all be smart enough to realize that by now. People kill people. People get hit and killed by cars everyday, sometimes deliberately even, but no one is screaming for car control.

Point of fact - in Texas, probably the most gun tottin' state in the country, guy walks into a bank, pulls out a gun, aims at a teller, and demands money. 30 minutes later the police at escorting him out in handcuffs. Why? Because 12 of the patrons and 2 of the tellers pulled weapons and pointed them at his head. That bank hasn't been robbed again. No one got hurt, no weapons were fired.

As stated before, I forget by who, criminals commit crimes because they think they can get away with them. The more likely it is that their victim will also be armed and capable of defending themselves, the less likely they are to risk their necks.

Guns used to commit crimes are generally obtained illegally anyway so better gun legislation isn't gonna do jack s**t. We need to better enfore what laws we have in place and get the illegal weapons off the market and put the dealers in jail.

I've got the right to own a gun if I want one, or two or three, and I like that right and plan to keep it.

Billy clubs might work fine in Great Britain, but if any cop here tried enforcing the law without a gun he'd be laughed at. That's just the mentality that we have. Fight fire with fire. Guns are used both to enforce the law and to break it.

I'm not saying America is more crime ridden. We have a very good police force here and I have no fear about leaving my door unlocked. I don't carry a gun. I don't know anyone who does. But I can't say I'd fault anyone for it.

That's my two cents.

------------------
Mengarath the Dragon

Life is too short to be ordinary.

[This message has been edited by Mengarath the Dragon (edited 04-09-2001).]

[Gav]

I've tried to stay away from this topic as I know how much Americans like their guns. I think this is a cultural problem. In the UK we are very much anti personal firearm. Americans see it as ther right.

Mengarath, everyone knows that guns by themselves do not kill anyone - they just make it easier. Also saying that all crime is committed by people who have illegally obtained their weapons also misses the point. They are still being killed by people with guns. Surely some gun control AND enforcement is in order. Also saying that having guns somehow deters violent crime also misses the point. You're just upping the ante. It's like playing rock paper scissors with a very bad outcome for the loser.

Its very rare for people in the UK to come to grief as a result of weapons fire precisely because your average person doesn't know how to get hold of firearms. Consequently its your serious villains and bona fide nutters who commit crime using them. And I don't want anyone here posting any messages saying, "that violent crime is on the increase in the UK yada yada yada" without backing it up with real checkable stats. Simply put. Violent crime is (for the most part) extremely rare. DO NOT believe media hype. One of your own police offcers pointed out in another thread (where are you Robbie) how surpised at the general lawfulness of people over here.

[latenight]

How about this then:

"Pundits and editorialists equate the rate of gun-related deaths with the availability of firearms. However, internationally, rates of violent crime and suicide appear to be independent of how extensively a country controls guns.

Russia, Estonia, Mexico, Northern Ireland, Canada and Hungary all have high rates of homicide and/or suicide despite restrictive gun control laws, and low rates of suicide are found in relatively well-armed jurisdictions like Israel and New Zealand.

Gun control laws are uniform throughout the United Kingdom, but murder rates are not -- in 1989 the murder rate per 100,000 people was 0.6 in England and Wales, 3.3 in Scotland and 7 in Northern Ireland.

When Canadian provinces and adjoining U.S. states are compared, threefold-to-tenfold differences in the prevalence of handguns have not resulted in consistently different rates of criminal homicide.
Perhaps the most powerful example that gun control does not equal crime control is the United States. Prior to the enactment of federal gun controls in 1968, guns could be bought virtually anywhere by any adult, but the national murder rate then was half what it is now.

In fact, evidence suggests that guns are an effective crime deterrent in the hands of legal owners.

A study published by the University of Chicago found that crime rates are lower when civilians are allowed to carry concealed weapons.

Murder rates in the District of Columbia and Chicago actually went up after each jurisdiction passed restrictive gun control laws.

Burglaries of occupied dwellings in the gun-free U.K. are much more frequent than in the United States.
It isn't even evident that gun control laws have reduced gun ownership in the United States. Despite more than 20,000 gun-control laws nationwide, firearms are present in about the same percentage of households today as in the 1960s.

Source: Daniel D. Polsby, "Firearms and Crime," Independent Policy Report, 1997, The Independent Institute, 134 Ninety-Eighth Avenue, Oakland, CA 94603, (510) 632-1366.

This is from: http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/pdcrm/pdcrm62.html

[This message has been edited by latenight (edited 04-09-2001).]

[attila]

Hi Mangarath

I agree with your line of reasoning. Appropiate tactics given the situation. Sad though that it need be. I was discussing the "colombine" high school shootings with my mom ( she lives in East LA by choice- man she is tough) and was grinning that such an incident could not happen at her local high school, when I asked why not she replied " It is called RETURN FIRE". Man, even the teachers pack...........

------------------
"Kill the men, save the women, and by the gods, do not spill the wine"

[latenight]

Try to find the study and post a URL. I'd like to read it.Even IF that statement is true. Higher rates of death by gunshot do not necessarily mean a higher per capita rate of violent crime. For example, our police shoot more criminals in the US than there unarmed counterparts in the UK, who have no means to do so

[This message has been edited by latenight (edited 04-09-2001).]

[Mengarath the Dragon]

Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not trying to be insulting. Sometimes I just think people in England (and other European and non-gun countries) have simply been without guns for so long (longer than we've been a country) that they believe that is the way it "ought to be." Like a spinal reflex reaction, or a programmed response. It's part of national pride. I know the right to own guns is part of our national identity in the US.

Gav, I don't think I'm missing the point at all. Criminals don't break into houses with signes that read "Alarm System" or "Beware of Dog." Likewise, they don't break into occupied homes when they know, or are pretty sure or even think there is a possibility, a gun is present. It is a deterent.

And how are more gun restrictions going to stop the criminals who got their guns illegally in the first place? And most real criminals get them illegally. They are already not following the laws in place, do you really think they'd follow the new ones? Or that the new ones would make it harder to obtain guns? Maybe in Britain, but not here. Better enforcement is the answer. And thougher penalties for people who use guns to commit violent crime.

I support laws that allow citizens with legally obtained weapons to carry concealed guns. Hell, I could even see a perfectly normal person carrying a gun in plain sight on their hip without a problem. Technically, under current law that is legal. Doubt anyone would try to mug them.

------------------
Mengarath the Dragon

Life is too short to be ordinary.

[Stryder]

"well, it's guns no matter what you say"
-mango

That just says it all.

I agree, all of the horrible things in this world are definately the cause of inanimate objects. Once this has been established, we can stop blaming each other for things. Then we won't have to feel bad for things that we have done, and we will all get along again.

"Big Hug."

And since when is Singapore an industrialized country? I'd call them more of an "industrialized city."

A word to the conservatives reading this: Don't get mad about the presence of ungrounded idealism. All it means is that the police have done their job too well. When crime is realy knocking at your door, we all believe in the 2nd Amendment.

[Amie]

perhaps if there was better enforcement of the laws that already exist we would actually get somewhere.

i don't like guns but i don't think taking away my right to own one is going to make it less likely that some wacko will obtain one.

Originally posted by mango fever:
take a look at Legislation: what happens - they STILL insist that control isn't the answer. I disagree with them totally, but, until there are enough of us, we're sort of stuck.
Any ideas?

Guns don't kill people. Bullets do.

Ban bullets!

[attila]

How about a poll?

Just how many fencers have/ own firearms?

I do. I live in a rural area where most bubbas are proud to say " We grow dope, shoot guns and drink beer"

------------------
"Kill the men, save the women, and by the gods, do not spill the wine"

[PisteOff]

I own a gun and have a Texas Concealed Carry Permit.

I only carry when I'm headed for 'rough territory' or traveling...

I've had some martial arts training, I'm a decent shot with a firearm, and now I'm working on my swordsmanship. I'm constantly working toward being "the most dangerous non-confrontational person I know". =)

PisteOff
"We deal in steel"

[veeco]

Well, my question I guess to all Americans is the following:

What do you mean by gun-control laws? Does it mean just saying it's illegal to carry a gun or does it mean closing all stores where you can buy a gun?

Sure, if you only say it's illegal to own a gun, I'm sure a lot of people will have some anyway.

If you destroy the source, then you'll get less guns. Guns are like drug basically in the US I think : it's forbidden to possess drugs, yet it's so easy to find. Retaliation is not the answer for drugs, however, for if you want to apply the same rules to the two, you'll see that there is actually little difference in concept, but yet in the way they are handled it's very different.

I find it interesting to hear people saying that's because the bad guys have guns that I have some. That's how we ended up with nuclear weapons in the first place, and risk getting nuked by any crazy little incident (like a collision between two planes (don't get me started on the it was their fault and not ours topic)).

Let's assume for a moment that the bad guys have all guns, therefore we all have guns. Well, the bad guys, being bad guys, will try to get something more powerful, to overfire you. Then, you, feeling insecure, are going to lobby for passing a law that allows you to carry the same kind of weapons that they have. In no time, you guys will all be firing at each other with scuds, and some guy will try to rob a bank with his latest biological missile.

See, in both cases, drugs and weapons, retaliation is not the solution. Education is the solution.

In Europe, a lot of people actually own guns. There are a lot of people in my village in France that have guns, for hunting, etc. In big cities, people don't have guns because they don't feel like they need one (a part from the criminals and the eventual sunday hunter). In Corsica, quite a violent place in Europe (due to mob wars and stupid nationalistic crap) lots of people own guns. It is therefore very violent.

In Europe, a lot of people had guns. I remember my grand-father telling me he used to go to school with a rifle as well. He would actually go to school with a rifle and his dog, and would go hunting afterwards. That doesn't necesseraly means it was the right thing to do.

Another thing, I can't name a gun control law that saved people, because that's what they're here for. Anyone who has to say that either doesn't understand the legal system, or is just a plain moron (God I hope they don't have a gun). Of course you don't know how much lives where saved by a gun control law, because you don't know how much times someone who wanted to by a gun legally with bad intentions got turned down.

On the other side, it's easy to point out that this guy had a gun and killed the "bad guy" before he killed someone else. In the end someone still died, sorry to point this out, but that's a bad thing.

If people were less selfish and actually realized that the greater strength in ourselves is the strength of cooperation, maybe we would not be stuck in this situation.

People, it's time you realize this: we are nothing more than a bunch of self reproducing ants with a bigger brain and far less muscle power (with the scale factor, of course). That big brain is our savior but also our demise, because it's probably the cause of this huge ego.

My advice is the following: leave the control of the criminals to the professionals, namely the police, and rest assured that provided no one hassles them for stupid things, they'll do their job fine, and you'll be living in a safer place.

Sorry, I felt like doing politics today.

[PisteOff]

Its just a question of ideology. I'm an American. Americans won their freedom through the use of force. I'm also a Texan. Texas won its independance from Mexico via a similar use of force. We have 200+ years of national history which reinforces the idea (at least to us) that firearms + determination + the grace of God = freedom. This national struggle for freedom translates into an idea of personal freedom - the freedom to bear arms - one of the things our forefathers fought for. I agree that most people shouldn't have guns. If guns had never been invented, we'd be having this discussion about knives or (eek!) swords. If swords had never been invented folks would be lobbying to take all of our wooden clubs away...

We are ants. (Ants kill their enemies.) But our civilization has progressed far enough to create very efficient means of ending the lives of others who threaten our wellbeing or our interests. (Bye bye Saddam Hussein, here's a cruise missle for you...)

I agree a police officer is much better trained and equipped to deal with criminals, but that fact does me no good when my car breaks down in the bad part of town and there's no phone around (hey, that rhymes...). I wish I had enough faith in my elected officials and public servants to say "aw heck, if I get into trouble someone will come and rescue me". I don't though. Counting on someone else to save your arse usually gets you dead.

You make a valid point, though, and I respect your view.

=)

PisteOff
"We Deal in Steel"

[Stryder]

Veeco-

It is the job of the police to enforce the laws, and to protect populace as a whole.
It is not the job of police to protect individuals. When have you ever heard of a policman stopping a crime from occurring? Never.
Police punish criminals. That is their method. They wait until after the crime is committed, then they show up, dust for fingerprints, and take pictures so that if it happens again they can call it a pattern. Then they keep a look out for a guy matching this or that description until one day they find him speeding or not using his blinker and they lock him up.

This is fine of the crime was stealing your stereo. But if the crime is murder, your interest in this story ended in act one. You won't care if he is caught or gets away to kill again. That is what policmen worry about. The second and third crimes.

No policman will save you, no security guard will save you. The only person that is there when you need him is you. And unless you're Jet Li, anyone who is out to hurt you will probably be able to.

Sounds paranoid, I know. But I believe in planning for the worst, and hoping for the best. I carry almost every day and in accordance with the concealed carry laws of my state. No one ever guesses. My friends don't know, my wife doesn't even realize it. (It is not a secret, she knows I carry but I just keep it 'concealed')

My point is, if there were danger (Heaven forbid) I would be able to defend myself. But until then, it is not an issue. I keep it hidden and carried in a way that no one could ever take it from me wihtout me knowing it. I don't feel the need to show it to friends, or flash it to scare away potential threats. I have never been in a position where I needed a gun, and I hope I never will. But why risk it? The thing only weighs ~5-6 oz.

[Mergs]

Deterence works. Not only on the global level, but on the personal level. The fact remains that since Texas has instituted the Concealed Carry Law, crime has decreased. Houston (my home) at one time had the highest murder rate in the US. That has dropped significantly. Not that guns are soley responsible for murders (knives, sticks, beatings, etc still account for a sizeable portion of the murders). The Second Amendment right to keep and BEAR arms was written during a time where the people still distrussed the central government and it provided a balance of power between the two. There was also the need of people to be able to provide food for their families by means of hunting as well as protection from others (yes, that means Indians and hiwaymen, etc).

Yes, I own a gun, however it is not a personal protection item (.44 cal 1845 Colt Walker, black powder) and it has never been fired. My family has never owned a firearm, except for a 1942 Mauser 98 my uncle brought back from Europe, it too has never been fired since that time. I have, however, handled weapons since the time I was 12 years old. And can say that I have fired weapons from .22 cal to 105mm, and have a healthy respect for them. And yes, I have made the statement before that an armed society is a polite society. I still believe that.

Another way to look at this debate is to say that American's attitude vice weapons, and European reaction to it, is similar to the European attitude to alcohol and the American attitude toward the same. It is a part of our culture just as alcohol is a part of European culture. Unfortunately the predominant culture that founded the northern portion of our country was PURITAN! Which, other than the War of Northern Aggression, is why we of the south have some heartburn with them.

[RC]

Here's a heretical statement. "Gun laws only work when they keep handguns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. This is because they are the source of the firearms for the criminal element."
Take a look at the homicide statistics from Canada (virtually no handguns allowed)and the US. Although the homicide rates for knives, clubs and rifles are very comparable, the handgun rate in the US is 4 times higher than Canada. That's a lot of dead people! Although you can argue self defence, and I'll admit that in the heat of the moment that gun in your hand is pretty welcome, just remember that the gun in the hand of the punk you're facing belongs to your neighbour.

[Hunbabe]

Do I carry a gun?
NO.

Have I ever had a gun pointed at my face?
YES.

Will I ever carry one?
NO.

Why?
I guess because I refuse to give in. If I can't protect myself with my bare fists, then f*** it.
With this, I'm not condemning people who carry guns for their safety. I'm just saying that I don't want to because it can make things way too complicated.

[Stryder]

"...If I can't protect myself with my bare fists, then f*** it..."

This was exactly my attitude before I had a family to protect. Now I have more to lose.


"I have nothing to gain by owning a gun, but a lot to lose by not owning a gun."
-Stryder

------------------
www.geocities.com/strydermike