Do Firearms Cause Murder...

[rmcrobertson]

Dear Ceicei:

Piffle.

In the first place, I can virtually guarantee you that I've lived and worked in far more dangerous places than you've ever seen. Newark in the 1960s. Phoenix in the 1970s. Compton in the 1990s. Never yet seen a situation in which I would've needed a gun, and one would've been useful. Never talked to anybody who thinks it would've been who wasn't a cop--wait a minnit, one guy. He backed a loony out of his house at 3 AM with a shotgun, and as a result came damn close to getting shot by the cops. It's fantasy otherwise, or I'm the luckiest guy on the planet.

Next, I suggest you pull the crime stats for England. Yes, they're up a bit, largely because of guns smuggled in from America. However, you might want to look at the numbers. They are miniscule, compared to ours. "Up," means what--another ten assaults, nationwide?

If you want to get into this cause-and-effect jazz, OK. But you're stuck with the facts that our murder and violent crime rates have been dropping for the last ten years--during precisely the period in which the NRA is claiming that more and more gun laws are taking our civil liberties. Looks like the gun laws work, eh? (Actually, a big chunk of the reasons are simple demographics.)

And again--people aren't talking about a gun for targets, or hunting, or even home defense. It's la-la land stuff, don't you think?

 

[Phil Elmore]

And if we're gonna throw cause-and-effect statistics at it, countries with strict gun laws--England and Japan are the obvious examples--have about 1/1000 our murder and violent crime rate.

Violence is culturally determined, not determined by the availability of weapons. Most of the nations with very strict gun control rates had vastly lower rates of violent crime BEFORE they enacted their current laws.

 

[khadaji]

Violence is culturally determined, not determined by the availability of weapons. Most of the nations with very strict gun control rates had vastly lower rates of violent crime BEFORE they enacted their current laws.

Avalibility also factors in when people who will be violent choose their weapon. Culture has a stronger pull, but avalibility also has a pull as well. Both are determined factors.

Guns, also provide a greater level of leathality then other methods of murder.

Also independent of murder, it provides a much greater risk of accidents.

My sister lived in Los Angoles for several years. She would always hid in the bathroom of her house, or leave town for New Years, because so many people would shoot guns in the air to selibrate the new year. I have seen the bullet marks in the roof of her house.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by khadaji
Avalibility also factors in when people who will be violent choose their weapon. Culture has a stronger pull, but avalibility also has a pull as well. Both are determined factors.

Guns, also provide a greater level of leathality then other methods of murder.

Also independent of murder, it provides a much greater risk of accidents.

My sister lived in Los Angoles for several years. She would always hid in the bathroom of her house, or leave town for New Years, because so many people would shoot guns in the air to selibrate the new year. I have seen the bullet marks in the roof of her house.

New Years and JUly 4th are days I avoid certain cities as well, as the weapons are out and being fired randomly. Yet, in one of these ethinic area, outside of these days you will here them complain about the guns in the criminals' hands and also how violent it is here and it is not so back where they come from. (* Where they migt have a current war going on for the last year upto 30+ Years. *) (* Also where the government would just walk into their house and kill people, yet it alwys better back home *)

I just smile and say you can always go back home cousin.

 

[Phil Elmore]

These areas do not suffer from greater availability of weapons, however. New York City and Washington, D.C. have some of the strictest gun control in the United States, yet they suffer from extraordinarily high murder and violence rates.

Firearms do not cause violence. Their availability does not contribute to rates of violent crime.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by Sharp Phil
Violence is culturally determined, not determined by the availability of weapons. Most of the nations with very strict gun control rates had vastly lower rates of violent crime BEFORE they enacted their current laws.

Also a very good point!

 

[rmcrobertson]

Violence is "culturally determined?" I'll be damned...that sounds like something other than individual choice operates when people make decisions...wait, wait don't tell me...I'll bet this happens because of communistliberals, right?

But nonetheless, I quite agree. When you have a culture in which people confuse owning a fancy handgun or AK knockoff with safety, with rights, with masculinity, there's going to be gun violence.

Then too, we have corporations and "the media," that have been flooding us with messages about Gettin' A Gun...

I repeat: if I thought I needed a gun to protect myself, I'd buy a good shotgun and/or move away.

 

[Cryozombie]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson


I repeat: if I thought I needed a gun to protect myself, I'd buy a good shotgun and/or move away.

I guess, when you are so Wealthy that living in an "affordable neigborhood" isnt a requirement this is a great option when crime comes to your area. Move.

Oh but perhaps I need to get overeducated and allow the Brainwashing of some Hippy Berkley professor make me braindead but get me a moderatly good job, so I can AFFORD to move someplace with less crime.

Nah. Id rather just buy that shotgun and retain my ability to think for myself, and see the facts as they are presented to me, as opposed to how I want to believe they are.

 

[Cryozombie]

Ok. Sorry about the above post. It makes my hackles rise whenever someone tells me to move because gangs have moved into my neighborhood and I am worried about crime.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Sigh. I repeat: a) I pretty much guarantee that I've lived and worked in worse neighborhoods, and...oh, what's the use.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Sigh. I repeat: a) I pretty much guarantee that I've lived and worked in worse neighborhoods, and...oh, what's the use.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

If you live in the worst place to live in the USA or in the 10th worst place, either place is bad. You do what you have to do.

If you can, and want to then moving is an option. If you do not want to move then stay.

 

[rmcrobertson]

And, "you do what you have to do," is an excellent example of the kind of cliche that is a good chunk of the problem. Sorry, Rich, but I didn't tell anybody else what they should do. And, I have indeed noticed that there are poor people. However, it seems to me that offering people guns instead of a halfway-decent place in which to live (and spare the further cliches about, "welfare," and, "handing people everything," because this is not what I'm talking about: I'm talking about giving everybody an equal opportunity under the law) is exactly the sort of "help," that we are at present stuck with.

I repeat: I have lived, and worked, in a lot of crappy neighborhoods. And I still haven't seen a situation in which a gun would've helped anybody who wasn't a police officer. If anybody thinks they're gonna get your Peacemaker out in time to stop a mugger, they're almost certainly fantasizing. What will happen is that you get yourself shot, or you....oh well. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

REAL self defense would rest on social justice. But then, that costs money, it's ideologically unacceptable to many, and it isn't very sexy.

 

[Makalakumu]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

REAL self defense would rest on social justice. But then, that costs money, it's ideologically unacceptable to many, and it isn't very sexy.

Check out the new thread...

 

[Cryozombie]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Sigh. I repeat: a) I pretty much guarantee that I've lived and worked in worse neighborhoods, and...oh, what's the use.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

I don't doubt the fact you have lived and worked in worse neighborhoods than mine, as mine is relativly tame as far as violence goes. Lots of Vandalism, street gangs on the corners who occasionaly throw things at passing cars, or strike them with bats. Robberys too... But a desire to live as safley as you choose to shouldnt be dictated by someone else's standard of saftey. Someone from The Cabrini Green Housing Development in Chicago might think my neighborhood was totaly safe, while someone from the Barrington subburb (Home to many Sports and Media celebritys from Chicago) would say it was a totaly unsafe ghetto. Who is more right to decide HOW dangerous it is? The Ghetto Person? The Rich Person? Or ME, who lives there?

Also I would challenge your statement that you "Cannot get your gun fast enough to defend yourself"

Tell that to all the people who have successfully defended themselves using a firearm. PERSONALLY I think it comes down to training.

I could recount a story myself, about having someone enter my home and before they were thru the sliding Patio doors my weapon was out and ready. (they could not see me thru the blinds) It turned out to be someone I knew, looking for me, and, because I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING WITH A WEAPON, I did not "accidently" shoot my friend. But had they been an intruder, I was ready to do whatever I needed to, which kind of "shoots down" (no pun intended) your VERY BROAD theory that "you cant get your gun in time."

Originally posted by rmcrobertson If anybody thinks they're gonna get your Peacemaker out in time to stop a mugger, they're almost certainly fantasizing. What will happen is that you get yourself shot, or you....oh well. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Cant the same thing be said of ANY type of "combat training" if you simply dont know what you are doing?

"If anybody thinks they're gonna get off a jumpkick in time to stop a mugger, they're almost certainly fantasizing. What will happen is that you get yourself beat down"

"If anybody thinks they're gonna get a knife out in time to stop a mugger, they're almost certainly fantasizing. What will happen is that you get yourself stabbed"

I will stand by my belief that if you TRAIN with your firearm, in preparing, drawing, SHOOTING, and of course, knowing WHEN NOT to draw and shoot...

 

[rmcrobertson]

Can you actually name anybody who has "defended themselves," with a gun, who was not a cop? Anybody you personally know, whose impressions you trust? What EXACTLY was the situation?

The Cabrini Green projects, famous in part for, "Candyman," were torn down some years ago, if memory serves.

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Can you actually name anybody who has "defended themselves," with a gun, who was not a cop? Anybody you personally know, whose impressions you trust? What EXACTLY was the situation?

You make it sound like as if gun self defense never happen or that they were fantasies...

I do personally know a few that have been successful with their defense in using a gun, and these weren't your "wannabe cops" nor were they the society paranoids. They were regular people that had bad situations happen, not necessarily because of their actions or of where they are.

You ask "What EXACTLY was the situation?" Would the sharing of their stories make any difference in your mind? You already seem set in the idea that people shouldn't need to have guns for self defense. Are you going to try to second-guess what could or should have happened with their situations, considering that their choice to use a firearm often had to be decided very quickly? The choice of using deadly force is not to be taken lightly, and the friends I have are trained with their weapon of choice. They understand the responsibilities, and were aware of the legal issues that could and did occur from these situations.

To decide whether a person should or should not have a firearm as their choice of self defense is best left to the individual.

-- Ceicei

 

[rmcrobertson]

Yes, knowing exactly what happened would indeed make a difference.

And incidentally, I certainly didn't claim that people I've never met wanted to be cops. If you must take offense, take it because of my suggestion---hell, I pretty much came out and said it--that this gun business has a lot more to do with men's ideas about being men than it does with self-defense.

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Yes, knowing exactly what happened would indeed make a difference.

I am wondering how this would make a difference to you? It is still a story to you about people probably unknown to you.... would knowing their situations change your perceptions?

I'm sorry if I sound cynical, but perhaps you are due more credit than what I'm giving you.

And incidentally, I certainly didn't claim that people I've never met wanted to be cops. If you must take offense, take it because of my suggestion---hell, I pretty much came out and said it--that this gun business has a lot more to do with men's ideas about being men than it does with self-defense.

Uhuh.... not always. I happen to be female....and into martial arts and also a gun owner.

- Ceicei

 

[rmcrobertson]

It is odd that anyone would avoid giving such details--changing names, of course, to protect people's privacy--when such details would offer such a good argument against what I'm arguing. It makes me suspect that there aren't any such details.

Here's my gun control compormise. As of New Year's, all men are prohibited from carrying or owning any and all handguns. All women are required to carry them.

I still say that the fascination with guns has more by far to do with male fantasy than with practical necessity.

 

[Jmh7331]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
...Be honest with yourself. We're talking a Glock. We're talking a cut-down AR. We're talking a street-sweeper, why shouldn't I have one? We're talking combat handgunning courses for weekend warriors. We're talking sniper school. We're talking I NEED an MP-5, I NEED the Stoner System, I NEED a laser sight. Christmas is upon us. We're talking let's pretend we're warriors, let's get ready for Armageddon, which we know is coming we read those Tim LaHaye books.

Be honest with yourself, even when you respond to this and start yelling. Nobody I ever heard is talking about taking away your hunting rifle. Nobody's talking about taking away your shotgun. Nobody's talking about taking away your tools for hunting and home defense and hobbies and target shooting.

We're talking about taking some of the toys away....

I am an avid (addicted) hunter. I also used to shoot competitively on a Glock team. Your mention of an AR, "street-sweeper" and MP-5 lead me to believe you have bought in to the media hype about "assault" weapons. I won't get into that but I will say my .30-06, 12 Ga, and .44 mag (all used for hunting) are more powerful than the aforementioned weapons. I have a concealed-carry permit for NY and PA. I don't carry because I don't have a need to but I am thankful for the right. I do believe there should be more training for those that carry. I don't know anyone that is worried about getting their "toys" taken away, most of the people I know are worried that taking away "assault" weapons is just a stepping stone for getting rid of all guns. - Just my thoughts.