Are you a Lefty or a Conservative (1 Viewer)

[chergh]

You've never hunted have you?

A 45 is perfectly legal (in Missouri) for deer hunting, and when it's close enough does a hell of a job.

Otherwise, when you've only wounded the deer, you can use a hand gun when you've tracked it.

I'd rather put a 45 cent bullet into a deer to finish it off than a $1.25 bullet.

Rather a weak justification, hunters in the UK seem to manage without handguns.

While those determined to kill someone will attempt it irrespective of if they have a gun or not, having access to a gun just makes it easy for them, and given it is easy to conceal a handgun compared to rifles and shotguns that just makes life even easier.

It's a lot harder to kill someone with other weapons and the primary purpose of a handgun is to kill a person.

I'm glad I live in a country where they are illegal.

 

[Vassago]

Rather a weak justification, hunters in the UK seem to manage without handguns.

While those determined to kill someone will attempt it irrespective of if they have a gun or not, having access to a gun just makes it easy for them, and given it is easy to conceal a handgun compared to rifles and shotguns that just makes life even easier.

It's a lot harder to kill someone with other weapons and the primary purpose of a handgun is to kill a person.

I'm glad I live in a country where they are illegal.

Yeah, of course, you also live in a country where the population vs armed robbery and assault are still far higher than the US. Because of the chance of the guy you are robbing having a gun, people tend to back off a little here. That, and the murders that happen here are typically 99% personal and not strangers, so if someone wants to kill someone, they will do it with whatever tools they have available.

Not to mention burglaries and carjackings are almost double per capita in the UK.

No matter how you look at it, total crime rates per capita are still higher in the UK than in the US. The tools that are used are just that, tools, people will do what they do regardless of what laws are passed. Criminals won't willingly give up their guns, so why should I?

 

[Adam Caramon]

No matter how you look at it, total crime rates per capita are still higher in the UK than in the US.

Could you provide your source?

 

[chergh]

Yeah, of course, you also live in a country where the population vs armed robbery and assault are still far higher than the US. Because of the chance of the guy you are robbing having a gun, people tend to back off a little here. That, and the murders that happen here are typically 99% personal and not strangers, so if someone wants to kill someone, they will do it with whatever tools they have available.

Not to mention burglaries and carjackings are almost double per capita in the UK.

No matter how you look at it, total crime rates per capita are still higher in the UK than in the US. The tools that are used are just that, tools, people will do what they do regardless of what laws are passed. Criminals won't willingly give up their guns, so why should I?

True, but removing gun control isn't going to make the UK any safer. The UK doesn't have a higher crime rate because we have strict gun control. I do however believe we have a lower murder rate because of gun control. The correlation between murder rate and gun ownership is undeniable.

http://www.gun-control-network.org/International.gif

 

[chergh]

Could you provide your source?

There is a lot of stuff that is easy to find on google. There are probably some difference in reporting and recording but it is undeniable uk crime rates are higher than the us

 

[Thales750]

I have owned guns and hunt with them.

Having said that, it takes a lot more determination to kill a human with a knife or a shovel, than it does with a gun.

And once you let the round down range, you cannot stop it.

 

[Adam Caramon]

There is a lot of stuff that is easy to find on google. There are probably some difference in reporting and recording but it is undeniable uk crime rates are higher than the us

I'm not questioning it, I'd just like to read the source. If crime rates, in general, are higher in the UK, I'd like to see exactly what they're classifying as a crime for that statistic.

 

[jamesmor]

Rather a weak justification, hunters in the UK seem to manage without handguns.

tell that to my father-in-law who's going to have to use a handgun this year to go hunting as he won't be able to hold a rifle because of surgury on his hand.

While those determined to kill someone will attempt it irrespective of if they have a gun or not, having access to a gun just makes it easy for them, and given it is easy to conceal a handgun compared to rifles and shotguns that just makes life even easier.

I'll agree with this somewhat. Those who are determined to kill will attempt it no matter what. But if you took a handgun away, they would just use some other type of gun.

Trust me, one of my highschool friends was murdered by a person with a high power rifle.

It's a lot harder to kill someone with other weapons

I agree. Most don't have the stomach for it.

and the primary purpose of a handgun is to kill a person.

the primary purpose of any gun is to kill SOMETHING what it kills is up to the person behind the trigger

 

[chergh]

I'll agree with this somewhat. Those who are determined to kill will attempt it no matter what. But if you took a handgun away, they would just use some other type of gun.

Trust me, one of my highschool friends was murdered by a person with a high power rifle.

Very true we had a lone gun man kill 12 people this year with a rifle, owned legally. People who want to kill others will use any weapon they can. If they have a gun it becomes much easier. The US situation is entirely different to the UK and banning in the US would be less effective, especially in the short term, at reducing gun crime as there are so many in circulation.

In the UK I consider gun control to be very effective, the police on the street in the UK don't even carry guns, and have to be trained to be allowed to use them at all. Would American police in a major city be willing to patrol the streets without a firearm? I doubt it, they would have to be crazy given the potential circumstances they could face.

the primary purpose of any gun is to kill SOMETHING what it kills is up to the person behind the trigger

yes but the handgun is ideal for crime and murder and not much good for anything else, except pistol shooting as a sport. You can use it hunting but do you really use it often as a serious hunting weapon?

 

[Vassago]

Could you provide your source?

Google it, there are plenty of sources...

Specifically look up exactly what I said, burglaries, robberies, armed robberies, carjackings, and total crime. The UK beats the US in all of these categories per capita. I would like to attribute this to the fact that you never know if the person you are about to do any of these things to is "packing."

Murder rates are higher in the US, and yes, guns probably have a lot to do with it, but like I also said, 95% or so of murders are personal, not random. I feel a lot safer living here than there since I'm less likely to be mugged or carjacked, and very unlikely to be murdered since I don't piss anyone off.

In the end, you still have to look at the fact that it takes a person with a will and drive to shoot someone innocent for the gun to be used for murder. If that person has that much determination to do it, they will do it, regardless if guns are outlawed. We have Mexico right next door and I'm sure plenty of guns filter through there to the US too. It'll always be available here, we don't have the benefits of living on an island. Trafficing of weapons and drugs across the border is neverending here.

 

[Vassago]

yes but the handgun is ideal for crime and murder and not much good for anything else, except pistol shooting as a sport. You can use it hunting but do you really use it often as a serious hunting weapon?

Yeah, I don't buy into the hunting tool explanation much. I do enjoy shooting off a gun at the range though. It's a great stress reliever and keeps me ready in case I ever have to defend myself or loved ones. You never know in this crazy world.

 

[PNGBill]

One sad fact of guns is the accidental death and injury. Especially to children where security is an issue.
Like finding a loaded handgun under their fathers pillow.

I used to have handguns but to keep them "safe" in the house they were in a locked box with the magazine removed and empty.

Of course, in this situation they are of little use in most emergencies and of more use to a burglar then yourself, so I no longer have any.

Little has changed in a 100 years to make guns "safer" if such a thing was possible.

 

[Vassago]

It's as simple as not hiding it from your kids. Show them what it is and educate them on how dangerous it is. Most kids that end up shooting themselves or someone else do so over ignorance and their parents sheltering them from "the big bad world." You know the type, the ones who freak out over a split second nipple slip during a super bowl and want to sue over the damage it caused to their child.

 

[Vassago]

You're also still talking about something that is very rare, your child has a better chance of being struck by lightening than accidentally shot.

 

[Kryst51]

It's as simple as not hiding it from your kids. Show them what it is and educate them on how dangerous it is. Most kids that end up shooting themselves or someone else do so over ignorance and their parents sheltering them from "the big bad world." You know the type, the ones who freak out over a split second nipple slip during a super bowl and want to sue over the damage it caused to their child.

I'm not saying that someone should be sued over that incident - However - I think there is merit in not exposing children to things that just aren't meant for them to know yet - A parent can make these decisions for themselves (within reason), but don't make that incident sound like it was nothing, because it shouldn't have happened. As far as teaching children that guns are dangerous, I think that is a good idea, especially if you have one in your house.

 

[chergh]

but don't make that incident sound like it was nothing, because it shouldn't have happened.

Yes a woman's nipple poses a clear and present danger to children.

Its a boob what's the big deal? It's not like she was rubbing oil into them.

Really, we were in the middle of a discussion regarding gun control and you thought the most important thing to comment was an unimportant comment about janet jacksons tits? Personally I would rather kids were interested in tits than guns.

 

[Kryst51]

Yes a woman's nipple poses a clear and present danger to children.

Its a boob what's the big deal? It's not like she was rubbing oil into them.

Really, we were in the middle of a discussion regarding gun control and you thought the most important thing to comment was an unimportant comment about janet jacksons tits? Personally I would rather kids were interested in tits than guns.

I also commented about the gun thing---- and I didn't bring it up Vass did.

As far as most important thing to comment on - Isn't it great, I can reply to WHATEVER someone says, whenever I want as long as I'm within the bounds of the forum.

 

[chergh]

I also commented about the gun thing---- and I didn't bring it up Vass did.

As far as most important thing to comment on - Isn't it great, I can reply to WHATEVER someone says, whenever I want as long as I'm within the bounds of the forum.

I never claimed you did bring it up and I still don't see whats with the outrage about a glimpse of a boob? What is a glimpse of a boob going to corrupt the children of america?

 

[Vassago]

(With EXTREME SARCASM) It's only acceptable after the people who create the nudeness or the nude people themselves are dead or it's a PBS show, then it's art or culture, so nudeness is okay...

But that's a whole different topic of discussion...

Regarding kids exposure to guns, how many cartoons did you watch as a kid with guns? Did it corrupt your mind? If you don't talk to the kids about guns and make them aware of the danger and just hide it from them, then all they know is what they see in the cartoons. Bugs Bunny never dies from getting shot by Elmer, so it must be okay...

 

[Vassago]

Screw it, the topic has been brought up already. How is non-sexual nudeness offensive? A boob and nipple by themselves are not sexual, only what is done with them. They are exposed to nudity from the day they are born!