PDA

View Full Version : Weapons: Your worst nightmare - Or your best friends?


Tina Croft
28-01-10, 14:21
i think it's in the eye of the beholder, isn't it? some regard a gun, knife or whatever as very dangerous weapons. and some may regard them as pretty useful in dangerous situations. how do you think about that?

i think, i would take a little knife with me as selfedefense, if i could. but then all my friends would freak out and think i'm crazy. besides it's just a matter of time when we even need a gun licence for our nailclippers over Germany...:rolleyes: and in Texas, for example, people are allowed to run around with bazookas lol^^

so this made me curious how other people regard that topic. please, tell me your opinions;)

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 14:24
in Texas, for example, people are allowed to run around with bazookas lol^^Err, no, I don't think so.

I like the idea of a gun for self defense, but the government here have ridiculously strict gun laws and even before hand guns were banned they weren't seen as things for self defense.

interstellardave
28-01-10, 14:24
They can be either. It's in the context of their use, and nothing more.

Until human nature changes it's always going to be that way. As long as the strong prey on the weak, weapons of some sort will always be desired to even things out.

ShadyCroft
28-01-10, 14:26
pretty much what StellarDave said. It depends on your use for it.

A pen could be a nightmare as well, if you use it to stab someone, and a knife could be your best friend if you wanna chop some veggies for a salad.

touchthesky
28-01-10, 14:27
http://www.manysmileys.com/files/C/rQ/6M/CrQ6MwGF65357560.gif

Weapons are the enemy.
All I want, and need, is a nice sparkly vampire or werewolf for protection..no guns.

New motto...Shove guns, Sparkly vampires!

Cochrane
28-01-10, 14:32
Personally? They scare me, and (regardless of laws banning or allowing them) I'd never want to have anything worse than a kitchen knife in my house.

Generally speaking: Weapons (at least those designed as weapons) have only one use: To hurt and kill (or train either; this includes things like sport shooting for me). Sadly, we live in a world where this is sometimes unavoidable, so I don't see them as always evil. Nevertheless, they should be treated with extreme respect, and the less there are needed and out there, the happier I am.

Tina Croft
28-01-10, 14:37
Err, no, I don't think so.

i'm not sure about that, but i once heard something like that on TV. not sure if it's actually right, sorry. but it's for sure that laws in Texas (what depends weapons) are a lot less strict than in Germany for example.


A pen could be a nightmare as well, if you use it to stab someone, and a knife could be your best friend if you wanna chop some veggies for a salad.

exactly. but why do so many people demand knifes and guns to be banned, if i could use anything else to kill someone?
or for some special knifes you need a gun licence (in Germany as far as i know), while you have a whole big sortiment of other knifes in your kitchen? it's unlogical imo

VictorXD
28-01-10, 14:39
Mehh... Its not the weapon that is the problem, its who has it. Like a knife, it can be used for: cut (slice or what ever) food, self-defense or a robbery or something:/
Now depending on the person, it could use for 1,2 or 3.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 14:46
i'm not sure about that, but i once heard something like that on TV. not sure if it's actually right, sorry. but it's for sure that laws in Texas (what depends weapons) are a lot less strict than in Germany for example.Don't always believe gossip you hear on the TV. I don't know of any place in the world where it's legal to run around with a rocket launcher, except in countries where there is no law at all. Texas certainly has more lax gun laws than Germany though.

Phlip
28-01-10, 14:48
Pepper spray. :) It's legal, stops someone in their tracks and doesn't kill them.

remote91
28-01-10, 14:49
Depends whose hand the weapon is in :p

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 14:58
Pepper spray. :) It's legal, stops someone in their tracks and doesn't kill them.Pepper spray is legal here?

VictorXD
28-01-10, 15:00
Pepper spray is legal here?

Why should it be illigal?

Chocola teapot
28-01-10, 15:00
I'd keep a gun in my home as protection if I could...

They're going to use extreme force to get in, I'll use extreme force to get them back out again.

Trigger_happy
28-01-10, 15:16
I'm glad guns are banned here. I don't think we need to bring them into our culture at all. Pepper spray and ninja skills should be it. Or tasers.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 15:18
Why should it be illigal?I never said they should be, it's just I know how anti-self defense the current government here are and I'm surprised that pepper spray isn't banned.

tombofwinston
28-01-10, 15:25
I never said they should be, it's just I know how anti-self defense the current government here are and I'm surprised that pepper spray isn't banned.

It is banned.

Pksstr
28-01-10, 15:26
I would like to have a sleeping pill dart gun ( like the one in AOD)

ShadyCroft
28-01-10, 16:16
exactly. but why do so many people demand knifes and guns to be banned, if i could use anything else to kill someone?

well, I guess its obvious, isn't it ? If you don't ban guns, then anyone can get a gun, and with more number of people acquiring weapons, there's a higher probability for it to fall in the wrong hands or to be misused.

Yes, its true that even with a gun ban, a bad person will find a way to acquire a weapon, but am talking about ratios and probabilities. Its more likely to be higher. :)

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 16:31
It is banned.Surprise surprise.

Phlip
28-01-10, 16:36
It depends how strong it is.

interstellardave
28-01-10, 16:40
I never said they should be, it's just I know how anti-self defense the current government here are and I'm surprised that pepper spray isn't banned.

And now that we know it's banned, anti-gun folk will say "learn self-defense" which is great and everything, until the criminal has an illegal gun... and then your self-defense ability may be completely compromised. And if you're old and infirm, good luck!

Anti-gun folk have precious few arguments for those scenarios. This has all been played out before, in history. The strong prey on the weak--and the gun proved to be the great equalizer. It's truly sad that it comes to that, of course, but it's reality.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 18:23
And now that we know it's banned, anti-gun folk will say "learn self-defense" which is great and everything, until the criminal has an illegal gun... and then your self-defense ability may be completely compromised. And if you're old and infirm, good luck!

Anti-gun folk have precious few arguments for those scenarios. This has all been played out before, in history. The strong prey on the weak--and the gun proved to be the great equalizer. It's truly sad that it comes to that, of course, but it's reality.

Oh come on. That discussion has been held before many times —*I think we do have good points, but as I don't think any of them will convince you, I'll not repeat them at this stage.

More interesting is the question: In what situation do you want to defend yourself like that to begin with? If it's a normal mugging, I'd rather let the thief get away with it and call the police as soon as I can than try to shoot him. After all, "great equalizer" works both ways, and by trying to defend myself I am placing myself in more danger.

There are situations where it'd be useful to be able to kill or hurt someone easily, that's true. But are they frequent enough that they justify all the risks that come with allowing guns? Any illegal gun was legal once, after all, before it got stolen or sold to someone with shady morals.

TombOfRaiders
28-01-10, 18:42
Weapons and me fit together, so my best friends. I may carry one around depending on the situation I'm in. Say like I'm about to be stabbed or shot I'd carry a small gun like a silenced MP5K on a jacket if I had one and only use lethal force when your 5 seconds away from death. I went in the shop once which sold M4A1s on the walls as well as tranquilizers.

lara c. fan
28-01-10, 18:43
I view them as both dangerous weapons and helpful items :)

interstellardave
28-01-10, 18:48
@ Cochran:

Believe me when I say to you that I would absolutely love it if guns--and all weapons were gone from the face of the Earth. I agree with that principal totally. In reality, though, it's so unlikely to happen that we have to accept their existence. Confiscating and destroying guns won't work unless it's done globally... but powerful criminal organizations would still be able to stockpile weapons and possibly even promote the illegal manufacture of those weapons.

So, like I said, as long as the desire to have guns remains, guns will be around... and that puts criminals in a position of total superiority to their victims; unless you have such a pervasive police state in place that a police presence is literally everywhere.

I just don't see how the genie can be put back in the bottle...

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 20:09
Firearms are too dangerous to be carried by civilians, I think. More of a threat to owners and third parties alike than any help against attackers. How many guns are misused? How many are stolen? How many accidents happen with firearms? Therefore, strict gun laws are a must. Firearms are way too powerful weapons to be distributed freely.

Trigger_happy
28-01-10, 20:56
Firearms are too dangerous to be carried by civilians, I think. More of a threat to owners and third parties alike than any help against attackers. How many guns are misused? How many are stolen? How many accidents happen with firearms? Therefore, strict gun laws are a must. Firearms are way too powerful weapons to be distributed freely.

That's my thinking to, but not so nearly suavely said. I think the punishments for carrying a weapon should be huge. They shouldn't be allowed here.

xXhayleyroxXx
28-01-10, 20:57
they are dangerous, yet can be beautiful. I find guns/swords very attractive - theres something which mesmorizes me about them. Don't worry - i don't go round buying them :p I admire from a distance

CuteKittenlol
28-01-10, 21:05
I'll put it this way; if i knew someone in my neighbourhood who owned a gun i would be **** scared to walk out my front door :) I also think carrying a knife around with you is bizzare, except pen knives/swiss army knives or whatever you want to call them. Yeah guns are cool and we probably all had a little fanstasy about beeing some bad ass agent who carries one around or something worse that effect, but at the end of the day i wouldnt want one anywhere near me

Chances you'll get assualted is next to none, sure if it happened then i'd probably wish i did carry a knife around, but i just don't think its normal, personally

Trigger_happy
28-01-10, 21:06
they are dangerous, yet can be beautiful. I find guns/swords very attractive - theres something which mesmorizes me about them. Don't worry - i don't go round buying them :p I admire from a distance

I totally agree: some can be a brilliant piece of craftsmanship and beauty, but I don't think everyone should be able to get them.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 21:58
That's my thinking to, but not so nearly suavely said. I think the punishments for carrying a weapon should be huge. They shouldn't be allowed here.They aren't allowed here already. :confused:

I totally agree: some can be a brilliant piece of craftsmanship and beauty, but I don't think everyone should be able to get them.Disarmament of the civilian population FTW! Self-defense is stupid...

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 22:08
Disarmament of the civilian population FTW! Self-defense is stupid...
So are school shootings and gun accidents. ;)

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:10
So are school shootings and gun accidents. ;)

Just what i was about to say :)

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:13
So are school shootings and gun accidents. ;)Of course, I don't believe I said they weren't. Kind of irrelevant what you just said there you know.

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:14
Of course, I don't believe I said they weren't. Kind of irrelevant what you just said there you know.

If everyone is allowed to have guns, thats exactly the kind of thing that will inevitably happen.

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 22:14
Of course, I don't believe I said they weren't. Kind of irrelevant what you just said there you know.
Not at all - if we're debating the pros and cons of firearms, their negative effects (desired or not) have to be mentioned.

spikejones
28-01-10, 22:14
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_JIxm3qZRnhk/StiK6HxAAeI/AAAAAAAAADU/c_8V7vAAQvQ/s1600/061211crossbow_2.jpg

http://wst.astroexonom.net/images/star.jpg

http://huntingexperienceforyou.com/wp-content/uploads/image/bow_arrow.jpg

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:17
If everyone is allowed to have guns, thats exactly the kind of thing that will inevitably happen.I never said everyone should be allowed guns. Fact is, I don't think having lax gun laws would work here simply because of the general public's alarmist and misinformed view of them.

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:20
I never said everyone should be allowed guns. Fact is, I don't think having lax gun laws would work here simply because of the general public's alarmist and misinformed view of them.

The public view is that guns can kill people. Thats true.

I dont think people should be allowed guns, but i think I told you in another thread a while ago.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 22:28
@ Cochran:

Believe me when I say to you that I would absolutely love it if guns--and all weapons were gone from the face of the Earth. I agree with that principal totally. In reality, though, it's so unlikely to happen that we have to accept their existence. Confiscating and destroying guns won't work unless it's done globally... but powerful criminal organizations would still be able to stockpile weapons and possibly even promote the illegal manufacture of those weapons.

So, like I said, as long as the desire to have guns remains, guns will be around... and that puts criminals in a position of total superiority to their victims; unless you have such a pervasive police state in place that a police presence is literally everywhere.

I just don't see how the genie can be put back in the bottle...

I agree in particular with the last sentence. In countries like the US, banning guns outright is not a useful idea, there just are too many. I'm coming at this from a german point of view, where guns are not generally allowed and crimes with guns far less of a problem than in the US. Here, a citizen facing a criminal will generally not be armed —*and yet we don't have a higher rate of murders than the US. So here, banning guns more than they already are can work for example to prevent school shootings. All of the recent ones in Germany were committed with guns lawfully owned by the shooter or his parents.

Also, illegal guns are directly related to legal ones. But even if a crime syndicate were to open their own weapons factory, most criminals who can get access to a gun now wouldn't be able to get one produced that way.

Of course, there are other issues to consider. In a huge country like the US, it's certainly not reasonable to expect the police to be able to cover everything, unlike the more densely populated countries in Europe, so having guns in the US does make more sense. But at the end of the day, the less guns there are, the happier I am.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:28
The public view is that guns can kill people. Thats true.

I dont think people should be allowed guns, but i think I told you in another thread a while ago.That is true, but most of the public also think that guns can't be used for self defense, which they actually can. Personally I'd like to see a relaxing of shotgun laws so that people can buy shotguns and keep them in their homes and use them to defend their property and their family if absolutely neccessary.

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:29
That is true, but most of the public also think that guns can't be used for self defense, which they actually can. Personally I'd like to see a relaxing of shotgun laws so that people can buy shotguns and keep them in their homes and use them to defend their property and their family if absolutely neccessary.

That would be fantastic, but theres no way to stop some child picking up his parents shotgun and walking to school with it. Theres no real way to both allow guns for self defence AND ensure that they are never used in attack.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 22:32
That is true, but most of the public also think that guns can't be used for self defense, which they actually can. Personally I'd like to see a relaxing of shotgun laws so that people can buy shotguns and keep them in their homes and use them to defend their property and their family if absolutely neccessary.
How necessary is this in the UK, today? How many crimes would have been prevented if people had shotguns in their homes?

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:33
That would be fantastic, but theres no way to stop some child picking up his parents shotgun and walking to school with it. Theres no real way to both allow guns for self defence AND ensure that they are never used in attack.Such instances would be very rare and it would be pretty hard for a kid to pick up a shotgun and take it into school unnoticed. A hangun? Yeah. A shotgun? No. Besides, we already have gun crime, just no self defense in our homes.

@Cochrane: I have no idea to be perfectly honest, but I'm sure there are situations where a home owner will need something like that to defend their family.

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:33
Such instances would be very rare and it would be pretty hard for a kid to pick up a shotgun and take it into school unnoticed. A hangun? Yeah. A shotgun? No. Besides, we already have gun crime, just no self defense in our homes.

My rucksack in high school could have fitted a shotgun in pretty easily if there was nothing else in it. And this isnt just about schools, see Mona Sax's post below this one.

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 22:34
That is true, but most of the public also think that guns can't be used for self defense, which they actually can. Personally I'd like to see a relaxing of shotgun laws so that people can buy shotguns and keep them in their homes and use them to defend their property and their family if absolutely neccessary.
What's to keep you from using your shotgun to rob me or to make sure you literally have the last word in a domestic quarrel? How would you make sure no criminal can get his hands on it?

Joely-Moley
28-01-10, 22:35
I hate guns. I would never own one.

My dad used to keep one in the basement and it always made me extremely uneasy.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:36
What's to keep you from using your shotgun to rob me or to make sure you literally have the last word in a domestic quarrel? How would you make sure no criminal can get his hands on it?At the moment criminals already do those things. It's not like gun crime is non-existent here.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 22:37
Such instances would be very rare and it would be pretty hard for a kid to pick up a shotgun and take it into school unnoticed. A hangun? Yeah. A shotgun? No. Besides, we already have gun crime, just no self defense in our homes.

@Cochrane: I have no idea to be perfectly honest, but I'm sure there are situations where a home owner will need something like that to defend their family.
Sure there are such situations. The question is whether there are enough of them to justify the risks of, yes, a kid bringing a shotgun to school (I strongly suspect that such a kid does not do it in order to keep the weapon hidden for a long time).

Also, what is such a "situation" precisely? If the robber is actually shooting at family members? If he's just armed? If he's simply breaking into the house?

Edit to add: At the moment criminals already do those things. It's not like gun crime is non-existent here.

Yes, but if your plan goes through they'll do it more.

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 22:38
At the moment criminals already do those things. It's not like gun crime is non-existent here.
You didn't answer my questions.

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:38
At the moment criminals already do those things. It's not like gun crime is non-existent here.

It would go up if we were allowed shotguns. If i had a random attack of depression or whatever, nothings stopping me from grabbing my handy self defence shotgun and shooting people in the street. At the moment, it would be hard for me to obtain a gun. I dont really know where to start (not that i want one)

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:42
Also, what is such a "situation" precisely? If the robber is actually shooting at family members? If he's just armed? If he's simply breaking into the house?If he's armed with any kind of weapon or using violence.

Yes, but if your plan goes through they'll do it more.Not necessarily.

You didn't answer my questions.They looked like rhetorical questions to me.

It would go up if we were allowed shotguns. If i had a random attack of depression or whatever, nothings stopping me from grabbing my handy self defence shotgun and shooting people in the street. At the moment, it would be hard for me to obtain a gun. I dont really know where to start (not that i want one)Nothing's stopping you from grabbing a knife and stabbing someone. Shall we ban people from having knives in their own homes now?

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 22:45
They looked like rhetorical questions to me.
They aren't. You're stalling.

T-Sex
28-01-10, 22:45
Nothing's stopping you from grabbing a knife and stabbing someone. Shall we ban people from having knives in their own homes now?

If i happen to have some kind of mental breakdown and charge after someone with a knife, they have more chance of escaping or fighting back then if i shoot them from halfway across the street.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 22:47
If he's armed with any kind of weapon or using violence.
Then you advocate shooting people who, without your law, would not have hurt the family.

Not necessarily.
Oh yes they will. I mean, seriously: Imagine yourself as a robber, a violent husband or whatever. If you got easy hold of a gun, especially in a world where more and more of your potential targets would have shotguns themselves, would you use it?

Your statement only works if criminals already have all the guns they will ever need now. Far-fetched does not even begin to describe this.

Nothing's stopping you from grabbing a knife and stabbing someone. Shall we ban people from having knives in their own homes now?
Two points:
a) A gun makes it a lot easier to kill someone. Whole "range" and "power" issue.
b) The only use of a gun is to hurt someone else. Same can't be said for knifes.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 22:57
What's to keep you from using your shotgun to rob me or to make sure you literally have the last word in a domestic quarrel? How would you make sure no criminal can get his hands on it?Nothing, but what's to keep me from breaking into your home with a knife or obtaining a firearm illegally and using it to rob you?

Then you advocate shooting people who, without your law, would not have hurt the family.If it is absolutely necessary, then yes. I don't believe you should have to wait for your family to get hurt before taking action.

Oh yes they will. I mean, seriously: Imagine yourself as a robber, a violent husband or whatever. If you got easy hold of a gun, especially in a world where more and more of your potential targets would have shotguns themselves, would you use it?Probably, but they'd also have more chance of defending themselves.

If i happen to have some kind of mental breakdown and charge after someone with a knife, they have more chance of escaping or fighting back then if i shoot them from halfway across the street.Depending on the situation, you could kill them just as easily and certainly more brutally than with a gun.

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 23:00
Nothing, but what's to keep me from breaking into your home with a knife or obtaining a firearm illegally and using it to rob you?
I think my chances of survival would be a lot higher. It would take a lot more effort and luck to obtain a firearm, not to mention to injure me. Thanks, but I feel safer without you owning a gun.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 23:01
Nothing, but what's to keep me from breaking into your home with a knife or obtaining a firearm illegally and using it to rob you?
The fact that it is a lot harder than doing so with a legally acquired firearm.

If it is absolutely necessary, then yes. I don't believe you should have to wait for your family to get hurt before taking action.
So let me sum this up. It's a problem that, as far as you can tell me, does not need fixing, and you propose to fix that by shooting people who, as far as you can tell me, do not need to be shot.

Probably, but they'd also have more chance of defending themselves.
So you're thinking Britain will get safer if there are more bullets flying around? That's an interesting kind of optimism.

Depending on the situation, you could kill them just as easily and certainly more brutally than with a gun.
Yes… but in a lot of situations, you couldn't. On average, a gun is more lethal.

Eddie Haskell
28-01-10, 23:02
I think my chances of survival would be a lot higher. It would take a lot more effort and luck to obtain a firearm, not to mention to injure me. Thanks, but I feel safer without you owning a gun.

:vlol:

What about me?

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 23:03
I think my chances of survival would be a lot higher. It would take a lot more effort and luck to obtain a firearm, not to mention to injure me. Thanks, but I feel safer without you owning a gun.If you're a criminal, obtaining a firearm is relatively easy, even here.

You can get shotguns here legally already. All I want really here is for the law to be changed so that a homeowner can use a shotgun for self defense against an attacker in their own home if absolutely neccessary.

Thanks, but I would feel safer with the knowledge that it would be a lot harder for an attacker to harm me or my family in my own home if I owned a firearm.

So you're thinking Britain will get safer if there are more bullets flying around? That's an interesting kind of optimism.I think Britain will be safer if people have the means to defend themselves against an aggressor in their own homes.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 23:05
If you're a criminal, obtaining a firearm is relatively easy, even here.
According to whom? Did you ever try it?

I think Britain will be safer if people have the means to defend themselves against an aggressor in their own homes.
Okay, so you do think Britain will be safer when there are more bullets flying around. Thank you for explaining!

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 23:08
If you're a criminal, obtaining a firearm is relatively easy, even here.

You can get shotguns here legally already. All I want really here is for the law to be changed so that a homeowner can use a shotgun for self defense against an attacker in their own home if absolutely neccessary.

Thanks, but I would feel safer with the knowledge that it would be a lot harder for an attacker to harm me or my family in my own home if I owned a firearm.
Make sure the shotgun can only be used for justified - i.e., to save an actually threatened life - self defense, and I agree with you. Point is, you can't. As it is, your gun is more likely to harm somebody else than to protect you, so I'm going to do everything I can to prevent you from getting one.

Mad Tony
28-01-10, 23:10
According to whom? Did you ever try it?No, it's common knowledge. There's a black market for guns whatever country you go to.


Okay, so you do think Britain will be safer when there are more bullets flying around. Thank you for explaining!Yes, in this case I do.

Make sure the shotgun can only be used for justified - i.e., to save an actually threatened life - self defense, and I agree with you. Point is, you can't. As it is, your gun is more likely to harm somebody else than to protect you, so I'm going to do everything I can to prevent you from getting one.Same with knives. Are you gonna try and stop people from getting those too?

Mona Sax
28-01-10, 23:12
:vlol:

What about me?
Same. Sorry. ;)
Same with knives. Are you gonna try and stop people from getting those too?
As Cochrane pointed out - less dangerous, different purpose.

Mr.Burns
28-01-10, 23:15
That would be fantastic, but theres no way to stop some child picking up his parents shotgun and walking to school with it. Theres no real way to both allow guns for self defence AND ensure that they are never used in attack.

Proper education from a young age, as well taking proper security measures can greatly reduce the likelihood of this happening. Of course there is no way to 100% prevent such an occurance but if someone really wanted to go to school and kill people, they could find ways to do it without a gun. A gun is the easiest option since it has the highest capacity to kill on a large scale.

Cochrane
28-01-10, 23:19
No, it's common knowledge. There's a black market for guns whatever country you go to.
Look, so far you were unable to come up with any numbers, a single report, a single source confimring any of the following, very simple, points:
- It is very easy to illegally get guns.
- A lot of criminals have guns.
- Robbers breaking into homes and harming the family is a serious problem.
- Allowing more people to own and use guns is unlikely to increase gun crime.
- Knifes are as dangerous as guns.

All of these points have been made several times here, and even thoug you are the one who thinks there is a need to act, you were never able to come up with anything better than commonplaces and "it's common knowledge". You can't expect me to respect this style of arguing, much less agree with it.

The impression that I get is that you want to have guns simply because you want to have guns, or out of a desire to follow your heroes, american conservatives, in everything they do, or just to annoy the more liberal members of the forum. You then try to come up with weak rationalizations for this. Maybe (hopefully) I'm wrong here, but so far, this is the impression I've been getting.

spikejones
28-01-10, 23:43
for all those who think more guns automatically means more crime, you may find this article interesting as it actually states the opposite according to United States FBI crime reports:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2009/1223/More-guns-equal-more-crime-Not-in-2009-FBI-crime-report-shows.
crap... link not working

anyhow... ill paste it here:

By Patrik Jonsson Staff writer / December 23, 2009
Atlanta

The oft-cited credo that more guns equal more crime is being tested by facts on the ground this year: Even as gun ownership has surged in the US in the past year, violent crime, including murder and robbery, has dropped steeply.

Add to that the fact that many experts had predicted higher crime rates as the US grinds through a difficult recession, and the discrepancy has advocates on both sides of the Second Amendment debate rushing to their ramparts.

After several years of crime rates holding relatively steady, the FBI is reporting that violent crimes – including gun crimes – dropped dramatically in the first six months of 2009, with murder down 10 percent across the US as a whole.

Concurrently, the FBI reports that gun sales – especially of assault-style rifles and handguns, two main targets of gun-control groups – are up at least 12 percent nationally since the election of President Obama, a dramatic run on guns prompted in part by so-far-unwarranted fears that Democrats in Congress and the White House will curtail gun rights and carve apart the Second Amendment.

Pro-gun groups jumped at the FBI report, saying it disproves a long-running theory posited by gun-control groups and many in the mainstream media that gun ownership spawns crime and violence. “Anti-gunners have lost another one of their baseless arguments,” Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, told the Examiner's Dave Workman.

Some gun-control groups have long sought to establish gun ownership as a health issue, which would expose purchasers to the kind of regulation now imposed on prescription drugs and alcohol. That view embodies the idea that mere exposure to guns makes people more violent.

But more pragmatically, groups like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence have mostly targeted illegal sales and gun-show loopholes as the primary problem in America’s gun culture. They say such loopholes and lax enforcement allow violent criminals to get their hands on used, stolen, and inexpensive guns. “The guns that cause the worst problems in this country are not selling for very high prices,” Brady Campaign spokesman Peter Hamm has said.
No correlation, researchers say

As advocates on both sides keep score, what’s the rest of America to think as they weigh the relative crime risks – and statistics – in their own neighborhoods?

The debate over whether guns spur or deter crime has been under way for decades. So far, research has come out with, in essence, a net-zero correlation between gun sales and crime rates. More likely factors for the crime rate decline have to do with Americans hunkering down, spending less time out on the town with cash in their pockets and more time at home with the porch lights on, experts say. So-called "smart policing" that focuses specifically on repeat offenders and troubled areas could also be playing a role, as could extended unemployment benefits that staved off desperation.

“We can absolutely draw a fact-based conclusion about [whether there’s a correlation between declining crime rates and increasing gun ownership], and the answer is no,” says David Kennedy, director of the Center for Crime Prevention and Control in New York. “There are very consistent findings that the acquisition and obtaining of carry permits by ordinary law-abiding people has either no or very little impact on the crime rate.”

He finds more evidence in the FBI’s new report, which shows crimes declining not only across a variety of violent and nonviolent crime classifications, but also in both gun-resistant and gun-friendly corners of the country.

“When you’re seeing declines [in violent crime] both in cities like Atlanta, which is in a relatively gun-friendly state, and in places like New York City, where it is essentially impossible for ordinary folks to acquire and carry especially handguns, then it’s not the guns that are driving the [statistics],” Mr. Kennedy says.
A possible deterrent effect?

But one prominent gun rights researcher, Gary Kleck, a criminologist at Florida State University in Tallahassee, leaves the door open to the idea that news of booming gun sales could have a deterrent effect on violent criminals.

“It’s possible that criminals hear about lots of people buying guns, and then you can see a plausible mechanism, that conceivably could have produced a reduction in murder,” says Professor Kleck. “It’s all a matter of perception, not reality, for prospective murderers."

----


take it or leave it.. whether you find the source credible or not is up to you. But I'm sure you can do some searching and get individual statistics on gun ownership increases vs. crime rate(s) decreases if any during the time this article was written.

Ward Dragon
28-01-10, 23:49
^ Here you go :)

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2009/1223/More-guns-equal-more-crime-Not-in-2009-FBI-crime-report-shows.

spikejones
28-01-10, 23:52
Thanks.. link must have parsed with the period outside of the code.

Eddie Haskell
29-01-10, 00:00
Here we see our friend Mad Tony with his new toy:

kMozp01yfXs


:D

Ward Dragon
29-01-10, 00:05
Here we see our friend Mad Tony with his new toy:

kMozp01yfXs


:D

I see :vlol: So does that make me the lady in the window? :p

Eddie Haskell
29-01-10, 00:23
I see :vlol: So does that make me the lady in the window? :p

It illustrates quite a bit of the subject. And yes, you can be the lady in the window. :)

No law enforcement agency wants or advocates for an armed populace. This creates a real hazard for our police and federal agents. Every domestic disturbance is treated as a possible firearm situation, every automobile stopped on the road is handled with the great care, etc. Allowing every Tom, Dick and Harriet to own and carry a gun is not going to make you as an individual safer. Example:

First, imagine a society where everyone owns and carries a gun (crazy I know, but stay with me). Now, you are shopping in a mall, and as you exit a store your ex-wife sneaks up behind you and puts her gun to your back. She whispers for you to go forward and out the doors. As you exit the doors, you turn around quickly in front of startled shoppers and knock her down. Then, you pull your own gun out and point it at her. As you do this, a hail of bullets rip into you killing you quick. The shoppers obviously guessed wrong.

Interesting, isn't it... :(

Love2Raid
29-01-10, 01:33
I am not very fond of things that are designed to kill, but people have been creating weapons since forever and there is no getting rid of them. We humans just can't live peacefully together, so the need will always be there. It's human nature. Better avoid using them whenever possible.

spikejones
29-01-10, 01:44
It illustrates quite a bit of the subject. And yes, you can be the lady in the window. :)

No law enforcement agency wants or advocates for an armed populace. This creates a real hazard for our police and federal agents. Every domestic disturbance is treated as a possible firearm situation, every automobile stopped on the road is handled with the great care, etc. Allowing every Tom, Dick and Harriet to own and carry a gun is not going to make you as an individual safer. Example:

First, imagine a society where everyone owns and carries a gun (crazy I know, but stay with me). Now, you are shopping in a mall, and as you exit a store your ex-wife sneaks up behind you and puts her gun to your back. She whispers for you to go forward and out the doors. As you exit the doors, you turn around quickly in front of startled shoppers and knock her down. Then, you pull your own gun out and point it at her. As you do this, a hail of bullets rip into you killing you quick. The shoppers obviously guessed wrong.

Interesting, isn't it... :(

this is a highly unlikely scenario. you're assuming that everyone who carries a gun is trigger happy. thats a far cry from the truth.

by the way, this isnt the old west anymore.

aktrekker
29-01-10, 03:11
In the US, home invasion has been on the rise, This is when criminals break in while you are home. The idea is not just burglary, but terrorizing and even killing the residents. Just google home invasion firearm and see what comes up. It should scare the hell out of you.

You want statistics about how easy it is for criminals to find guns? Again, just google it. You'd be surprised what comes up, even if you limit the search by country. It happens far more than you believe.

Any firearm training instructor, or even those with military training, can tell you that in close quarters, a knife is far more dangerous than a gun. One standard demonstration used in the US is to have someone with a fake knife run at you, and see if you can draw your gun fast enough to save yourself. Within about 20 feet, you will fail, and the knife wielder will kill you. So yes, knives are very dangerous.
Just consider someone with a knife confronting you. Would you dare try to attack them? They don't even have to aim, just slash. You will be cut to the bone, muscle and tendons severed, and you become totally helpless.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Switzerland. Everyone has mandatory military service. Everyone keeps a firearm at home. They have the lowest rate of violent crime in the world (at least they used to, I assume they still do).

Mad Tony
29-01-10, 06:37
Look, so far you were unable to come up with any numbers, a single report, a single source confimring any of the following, very simple, points:
- It is very easy to illegally get guns.
- A lot of criminals have guns.
- Robbers breaking into homes and harming the family is a serious problem.
- Allowing more people to own and use guns is unlikely to increase gun crime.
- Knifes are as dangerous as guns.

All of these points have been made several times here, and even thoug you are the one who thinks there is a need to act, you were never able to come up with anything better than commonplaces and "it's common knowledge". You can't expect me to respect this style of arguing, much less agree with it.

The impression that I get is that you want to have guns simply because you want to have guns, or out of a desire to follow your heroes, american conservatives, in everything they do, or just to annoy the more liberal members of the forum. You then try to come up with weak rationalizations for this. Maybe (hopefully) I'm wrong here, but so far, this is the impression I've been getting.Well this is a pretty good article

http://www.savvysurvivor.com/black_market_guns.htm

Wow, how wrong and presumptuous you are (as usual), not to mention you've conveniently been ignoring what I've been saying in certain places. For example, I explicitly said I don't think we should have American style (e.g. lax) gun laws here because it wouldn't work in this particular country as I've already explained. All I said was that I think people should be able to use the shotguns that are already available to defend their families if it's absolutely neccessary. Right now shotguns are only allowed to be used for things like hunting and sport I believe. You seem to be interpreting this as "Legalize every gun there is" as well as using emotive phrases like "you think things would be safer with more bullets flying around?" to try and rationalize your anti-self defense argument.

Also, just because I agree with American conservatives on a lot of things doesn't make them my "heroes". That's just a pathetic little jab.

Now I expect all you'll pay attention to from this post is "I think people should be able to use shotguns" and "legalize every gun there is".

Cochrane
29-01-10, 07:17
In the US, home invasion has been on the rise, This is when criminals break in while you are home. The idea is not just burglary, but terrorizing and even killing the residents. Just google home invasion firearm and see what comes up. It should scare the hell out of you.

You want statistics about how easy it is for criminals to find guns? Again, just google it. You'd be surprised what comes up, even if you limit the search by country. It happens far more than you believe.
Nope, you do the googling, please. I doubt I'd be able to find whatever articles you mean, and then we have a long argument on who of us is lying about what the articles said just because I used the wrong search terms. Also, you're the one trying to convince us non-gun-fans that it's a problem, so why should we have to do the hard work? I wouldn't expect it the other way around either.

Any firearm training instructor, or even those with military training, can tell you that in close quarters, a knife is far more dangerous than a gun. One standard demonstration used in the US is to have someone with a fake knife run at you, and see if you can draw your gun fast enough to save yourself. Within about 20 feet, you will fail, and the knife wielder will kill you. So yes, knives are very dangerous.
Just consider someone with a knife confronting you. Would you dare try to attack them? They don't even have to aim, just slash. You will be cut to the bone, muscle and tendons severed, and you become totally helpless.
You're completely missing the point. We all know people can be killed with a knife, and that this is very easy in certain situations. I'm talking about in general, though. In close quarters, I'd be killed by someone with a gun or a knife anyway, if they really wanted me dead. But the longer the distance becomes (for example in a situation like a school shooting), the better my chances are against a knife-weilder, namely my chances of running away.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Switzerland. Everyone has mandatory military service. Everyone keeps a firearm at home. They have the lowest rate of violent crime in the world (at least they used to, I assume they still do).
They are discussing stricter gun control to reduce gun-related crime, though.

Well this is a pretty good article

http://www.savvysurvivor.com/black_market_guns.htm
Interesting article. It stays very vague on how much this is an actual problem, though.

Wow, how wrong and presumptuous you are (as usual), not to mention you've conveniently been ignoring what I've been saying in certain places. For example, I explicitly said I don't think we should have American style (e.g. lax) gun laws here because it wouldn't work in this particular country as I've already explained. All I said was that I think people should be able to use the shotguns that are already available to defend their families if it's absolutely neccessary. Right now shotguns are only allowed to be used for things like hunting and sport I believe. You seem to be interpreting this as "Legalize every gun there is" as well as using emotive phrases like "you think things would be safer with more bullets flying around?" to try and rationalize your anti-self defense argument.
Now I am not familiar with british gun laws, to be honest, but are you really telling me that it is illegal to use a legally owned gun in an acute self-defense situation, i.e. when you or someone else is directly threatened? I find that hard to believe. Or are you suggesting that behavior like that guy (forgot his name) who shot unarmed, fleeing burglars should be legalized on some notion of self-defense?

Yes, you do not advocate american-style laws (yet), but you do advocate shooting at more people, and for the most part, I don't see how there is too much of a difference. After all, when talking with americans the discussion usually focuses on the "robber in your home" situation anyway. I still believe that your proposal will lead to more people owning guns: If there are more legal uses, more people will be interested, and I doubt that legislators and/or courts will allow a new "right to armed self-defense" to apply to only those with valid hunting licenses and the like.

As for the emotive statements: You keep using empty phrases "like defend my family". Either stop that or let me get in my own. Show me why you need a gun to protect your family. All you did so far is show why you feel so, but you admitted yourself that there is no hard data indicating that it is absolutely necessary.

Also, just because I agree with American conservatives on a lot of things doesn't make them my "heroes". That's just a pathetic little jab.
Not? Damn, I was so sure about that.

Draco
29-01-10, 07:18
I dont care if the rest of the world is too chicken**** to respect the need for firearms. I do and nobody can take them away.

ozzman
29-01-10, 10:10
my Katana is my best friend,but i agree that they are dangerous, so i don't let my swords or Handguns leave my house. my room is filled with knives , feel bad for the person who trys to break in to my home <,<

Aranara
29-01-10, 10:39
I would like to carry with me dual pistols :rolleyes:

interstellardave
29-01-10, 10:39
No law enforcement agency wants or advocates for an armed populace. This creates a real hazard for our police and federal agents. Every domestic disturbance is treated as a possible firearm situation, every automobile stopped on the road is handled with the great care

If Law Enforcement is reticent to enter someones' home for fear the occupants are armed that clearly supports the popular theory that criminals will likewise be deterred from doing the same. That doubt alone can make a homeowner safe.

Now if guns were eventually outlawed criminals would not fear so much for their own safety when entering someones' home... in fact they would be emboldened by the assumption that the homeowners cannot defend themselves.

Mad Tony
29-01-10, 16:37
Now I am not familiar with british gun laws, to be honest, but are you really telling me that it is illegal to use a legally owned gun in an acute self-defense situation, i.e. when you or someone else is directly threatened? I find that hard to believe. Or are you suggesting that behavior like that guy (forgot his name) who shot unarmed, fleeing burglars should be legalized on some notion of self-defense?I don't know for certain, but I think it's highly likely. Defending yourself in your own home without the use of a weapon is frowned upon by the government, so I suspect using a legally owned weapon to defend yourself in your home is illegal too.

What guy are you talking about?

As for the emotive statements: You keep using empty phrases "like defend my family". Either stop that or let me get in my own. Show me why you need a gun to protect your family. All you did so far is show why you feel so, but you admitted yourself that there is no hard data indicating that it is absolutely necessary.What's to stop an armed criminal from breaking into a home and threatening a family?

Not? Damn, I was so sure about that.Sarcasm?

lara c. fan
29-01-10, 16:42
, feel bad for the person who trys to break in to my home <,<

Feel bad for you if he comes into your room and you don't wake up, and he grabs free weapons...:pi:

Eddie Haskell
29-01-10, 17:03
If Law Enforcement is reticent to enter someones' home for fear the occupants are armed that clearly supports the popular theory that criminals will likewise be deterred from doing the same. That doubt alone can make a homeowner safe.

Now if guns were eventually outlawed criminals would not fear so much for their own safety when entering someones' home... in fact they would be emboldened by the assumption that the homeowners cannot defend themselves.

We have police, law enforcement officers and an entire legal process system behind them for a reason. If everyone was allowed to carry, the process would break down into a vigilante system where each citizen could be judge, jury and executioner. Just like the wild west.

Quasimodo
29-01-10, 17:08
We have police, law enforcement officers and an entire legal process system behind them for a reason. If everyone was allowed to carry, the process would break down into a vigilante system where each citizen could be judge, jury and executioner. Just like the wild west.

You're probably right. (http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/concerns-about-concealed-carry/150-mass-shootings-by-concealed-handgun-permit-holders-in-2009)

interstellardave
29-01-10, 17:26
We have police, law enforcement officers and an entire legal process system behind them for a reason. If everyone was allowed to carry, the process would break down into a vigilante system where each citizen could be judge, jury and executioner. Just like the wild west.

There's a big difference between being allowed to own a gun and being allowed to carry a gun. Owning a gun for home protection should be allowed. Police exist to enforce laws... not protect citizens regardless of what they say. They simply can't protect you 24/7. If you're in your home and someone breaks in to accost you no cop will be there to defend you.

Mad Tony
29-01-10, 19:49
There's a big difference between being allowed to own a gun and being allowed to carry a gun. Owning a gun for home protection should be allowed. Police exist to enforce laws... not protect citizens regardless of what they say. They simply can't protect you 24/7. If you're in your home and someone breaks in to accost you no cop will be there to defend you.I agree completely. Unfortunately here the attitude of the government is very much "leave it to the police and don't take matters into your own hands". That's all well and good but not if lives are at stake and the police aren't in the area.

Cochrane
29-01-10, 22:13
I don't know for certain, but I think it's highly likely. Defending yourself in your own home without the use of a weapon is frowned upon by the government, so I suspect using a legally owned weapon to defend yourself in your home is illegal too.
How is it frowned upon specifically? I know I sound like a broken record here, but there must be some reason why you think it's not allowed, and I'd like to know that simply because I'm curious.

What guy are you talking about?
It's been quite a while, but the story was all over the news when I first went to England quite a long time ago. It went something like this: The guy was living in some remote location and had repeated trouble with break-ins, and the police were neither able to be there fast enough to prevent it, nor willing to assign someone to protect just his farm or whatever. In the end, he got a gun, and at some point shot at three teenage criminals who were breaking into his house, killing one of them. They were unarmed and apparently leaving/fleeing when he shot them.

Of course he went to jail, although not for a too long time, and then there was a huge debate about whether he was evil or a hero, with the division going along the obvious lines. I probably got some of the details wrong (it was long ago, I spoke worse even english then than I do now, and I didn't really care), but that's the gist of the story.

What's to stop an armed criminal from breaking into a home and threatening a family?
That's entirely the wrong sort of question. If you just go by hypothetical scenarios, you could justify anything. What's to say that someone won't deliberately try to run over someone else with a car? Better make all cars out of rubber. What's to say that most people on a flight won't get incapacitated? Better train every passenger on how to fly a plane. What's to say someone won't try to destroy your house with a tank? Better get a bazooka.

Obviously, all of those are rubbish and unlikely ever to happen, so the proposed measures are useless. This is exactly my point: We need to know how large the actual danger is. Guns are an inherently dangerous thing — that's why they're bought, after all. So if you want to allow their use were it wasn't allowed before, you better have a better reason than just that it makes you feel safe, or that something bad might happen if you didn't have it. A full analysis on whether allowing the (respectively more) use of shotguns in, say, a burglary situation would actually benefit anyone is probably not possible because you have to make all sorts of assumptions. But what should be fairly easy is finding out whether it's really a problem right now. As far as I can tell, it's not, so I'd much rather go the safe route of keeping things as they are.

So far, you've only shown that criminals breaking into homes and threatening people can be a problem. It can, that's out of the question. I want to know whether it actually, statistically speaking, is.

Ward Dragon
29-01-10, 22:21
That's entirely the wrong sort of question. If you just go by hypothetical scenarios, you could justify anything. What's to say that someone won't deliberately try to run over someone else with a car? Better make all cars out of rubber. What's to say that most people on a flight won't get incapacitated? Better train every passenger on how to fly a plane. What's to say someone won't try to destroy your house with a tank? Better get a bazooka.

None of those things have happened to me, but there have been at least three break-ins and robberies on my street that I can remember. It feels safer having a shotgun handy.

Cochrane
29-01-10, 22:35
None of those things have happened to me, but there have been at least three break-ins and robberies on my street that I can remember. It feels safer having a shotgun handy.

Yes, in that situation it would probably make sense (although I would also ask why the police isn't doing more to stop crime, but that is another issue). In MT's case, though?

Capt. Murphy
29-01-10, 22:51
Speaking of guns... IMO: It could be a wise investment - for strictly self defense, and anyone that is going to have one should probably practice with it to perfect their aim... Because if you did have to use it - (Or if I had to use one) I'd want to make sure I could shoot where I needed to, so as to either incapacitate (non-lethal shot) or terminate - if (God forbid) either situation -requiring said actions- should arise. :( Always fire a warning shot first... If they don't realize or care about the potential danger they're putting themselves in - then you can make the decision of where you may shoot. But what if you only had a split second to decide? o_0

Eddie Haskell
29-01-10, 23:02
Speaking of guns... IMO: It could be a wise investment - for strictly self defense, and anyone that is going to have one should probably practice with it to perfect their aim... Because if you did have to use it - (Or if I had to use one) I'd want to make sure I could shoot where I needed to, so as to either incapacitate (non-lethal shot) or terminate - if (God forbid) either situation -requiring said actions- should arise. :( Always fire a warning shot first... If they don't realize or care about the potential danger they're putting themselves in - then you can make the decision of where you may shoot. But what if you only had a split second to decide? o_0

And then there was this very sad event (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshihiro_Hattori).

Capt. Murphy
29-01-10, 23:06
And then there was this very sad event (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoshihiro_Hattori).

That's a reason why someone should fire a warning shot first - especially (or ONLY) if they think they're in a life or death situation.

Maybe it'd be good to have 2 guns... One with blanks in them.

Edit: It's too bad that some people just seem (or come across) as having an itchy trigger finger. But why don't we do away with cars since people can be accidentally killed by those too?

Eddie Haskell
29-01-10, 23:08
That's a reason why someone should fire a warning shot first - especially (or ONLY) if they think they're in a life or death situation.

Edit: It's too bad that some people just seem (or come across) as having an itchy trigger finger. But why don't we do away with cars since people can be accidentally killed by those?

While I agree with that, how would that have made a difference here?

Ward Dragon
29-01-10, 23:09
That's a reason why someone should fire a warning shot first - especially (or ONLY) if they think they're in a life or death situation.

People shouldn't be firing their guns out into the street. The kid was in the driveway and the homeowner shouldn't have shot at all. Shooting would only be justified if the person had actually broken into the house and the homeowner was defending himself.

Eddie Haskell
29-01-10, 23:15
People shouldn't be firing their guns out into the street. The kid was in the driveway and the homeowner shouldn't have shot at all. Shooting would only be justified if the person had actually broken into the house and the homeowner was defending himself.

Yes, that is why we have doors. Knock-knock...Whose there? Sorry, you have the wrong house.

Not "here's a .44 slug to the chest".

Capt. Murphy
29-01-10, 23:19
While I agree with that, how would that have made a difference here?

Thanks for your question Eddie. In this given situation the fault was clearly on the gun owner. Had he taken more care to warn the one he perceived to be an "intruder" - this unfortunate event could have more likely been avoided. And, may I add; had the gun owner considered other possibilities, such as someone having their vehicle breakdown and needed assistance, or any other scenario where someone may need the help of another person -- this unfortunate event would have been avoided completely.

A gun is only as useful, or evil as the person using it.

aktrekker
30-01-10, 01:25
With strict gun control laws, is it safer in the UK?
You asked for the links.....

home invasion

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8906572
http://www.planetda.net/index.php?showtopic=23998&view=getnewpost
http://www.newstin.co.uk/related.a?edition=uk&group_id=en-010-021513906&similarFilter=ALL
http://www.ehow.co.uk/how_2096936_prepare-safe-room-against-home.html
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f54/sickening-home-invasion-victim-gets-jail-time-invaders-get-none-uk-1115939/
http://www.securityworldnews.com/articles/612/1/Preventing-Home-Invasion/Page1.html
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=649538
http://www.whatprice.co.uk/health/parent/home-invasion-prevention-tips.html
http://www.ehow.co.uk/how_5785261_discourage-home-break_ins_invasion-robbery.html

gun crime

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/most-gun-crimes-go-unreported-in-the-uk-study_10065554.html
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23798046-gangland-shootings-lead-to-dramatic-rise-in-london-gun-crime.do
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-161099266.html
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2010/01/04/blotter/doc4b41bf1c8adde656563416.txt
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/01/shots-fired-at-schaumburg-police-3-arrested.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6960431.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576406/28-gun-crimes-committed-in-UK-every-day.html
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/policing-and-crime/london-crime-figures-show-gun-problem-remains-$1219138.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://www.bloggernews.net/14139
http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/media-centre/crime-in-the-news/may-2008--crime-in-the-news/gangs-move-gun-crime-into-preston
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7191769.stm

and knives

http://www.knifecrimes.org/uk-knife-crime-victims.html
http://www.insight-security.com/facts-knife-crime-stats.htm
http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=26912943426

and some other links

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=409
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/capital-gun-crime-rises-by-50-per-cent-524068.html
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/u-k-crime-statistics-hit-record-high/
http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/blanks/081400.htm
http://www.newnation.vg/forums/showthread.php?p=316567
http://www.blogcatalog.com/blogs/women-of-caliber/posts/tag/second%20amendment/

Admles
30-01-10, 02:18
Weapons are inanimate objects; they don't kill people, people kill people.

Cochrane
30-01-10, 07:25
With strict gun control laws, is it safer in the UK?
You asked for the links.....

home invasion

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8906572
http://www.planetda.net/index.php?showtopic=23998&view=getnewpost
http://www.newstin.co.uk/related.a?edition=uk&group_id=en-010-021513906&similarFilter=ALL
http://www.ehow.co.uk/how_2096936_prepare-safe-room-against-home.html
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f54/sickening-home-invasion-victim-gets-jail-time-invaders-get-none-uk-1115939/
http://www.securityworldnews.com/articles/612/1/Preventing-Home-Invasion/Page1.html
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=649538
http://www.whatprice.co.uk/health/parent/home-invasion-prevention-tips.html
http://www.ehow.co.uk/how_5785261_discourage-home-break_ins_invasion-robbery.html
Two of them are the same story, one of them is a 404, three of them are how-to-guides and two don't relate to the UK at all. I know I'm being picky, but I generally prefer fewer links along with an explanation why you think it proves your point.

gun crime

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/most-gun-crimes-go-unreported-in-the-uk-study_10065554.html
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23798046-gangland-shootings-lead-to-dramatic-rise-in-london-gun-crime.do
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-161099266.html
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2010/01/04/blotter/doc4b41bf1c8adde656563416.txt
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/01/shots-fired-at-schaumburg-police-3-arrested.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6960431.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576406/28-gun-crimes-committed-in-UK-every-day.html
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/policing-and-crime/london-crime-figures-show-gun-problem-remains-$1219138.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://www.bloggernews.net/14139
http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/media-centre/crime-in-the-news/may-2008--crime-in-the-news/gangs-move-gun-crime-into-preston
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7191769.stm

and knives

http://www.knifecrimes.org/uk-knife-crime-victims.html
http://www.insight-security.com/facts-knife-crime-stats.htm
http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=26912943426

and some other links

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=409
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/capital-gun-crime-rises-by-50-per-cent-524068.html
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/u-k-crime-statistics-hit-record-high/
http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/blanks/081400.htm
http://www.newnation.vg/forums/showthread.php?p=316567
http://www.blogcatalog.com/blogs/women-of-caliber/posts/tag/second%20amendment/

Melonie Tomb Raider
30-01-10, 07:30
Best friends, of course. :D It's nice to know you can protect yourself if/ when need be. :)

aktrekker
30-01-10, 08:01
Two of them are the same story, one of them is a 404, three of them are how-to-guides and two don't relate to the UK at all. I know I'm being picky, but I generally prefer fewer links along with an explanation why you think it proves your point.

Sorry, I'm on dialup. Fancy, modern pages take a minute or more to load. Not enough time to checkout the links at that pace. There's just too many.

Goose
30-01-10, 10:49
Banning guns here, interms of using them as a defence against home invaders will or has cost more lives then its saves., when considering burglaries only.

Your allowed to own a rifle that fires a 7.62 round or above, in the military i fire a 5.56, thats enough to tear up someones insides with one shot, and cause a very slow and painful death. 7.62 will literally take a head or an arm off, and will kill instantly. however, a home ownder who owns a pistol that fires 9mm rounds will have to fire a good few rounds into an intruder before killing him, making it a safer weapon.

All the government has done is force weapon owners away from softer calibers, like the 9mm, and into the hands of manufacturers of heavy calibers usually used for long range sport shooting. Trust me, if you break into a house, and the owner shoots you with a bullet designed for a target 600 meters away, your not going to see tomorrow, even if it hits you in the crotch.