Free Speech!! Free Speech!!

It isn't just the "establishment". It's the morons that believe guns kill people, and would have you believe the police will protect you from violent crime.

But they've been at it longer than 10-15 years. first time I remember hearing of the anti-gun knuckleheads was the 70s, and they were an already-established group of fanatics.

Just on that, good point about the police. The police will not protect anyone from anything - specifically. But the existence of the police makes it more likely that you won't suffer from violent crime.

I can go on with this (in a non-confrontational manner) if it's of interest because I find this a fascinating topic.
 
LOL
Where is most gun crime?
Cities with strict gun control.
Thank you... thank you very much.

Doesn't matter she has set up a criteria for you to fail, she is requiring that the study be in a place that went from HIGH restrictions on weapons to MUCH less ones.

Now never mind that we can compare locals with the differences and we find crimes with weapons are higher, much higher in any local with heavy ownership restrictions and that these same crimes are generally lower in places were the population can arm themselves.
 
Doesn't matter she has set up a criteria for you to fail, she is requiring that the study be in a place that went from HIGH restrictions on weapons to MUCH less ones.

Now never mind that we can compare locals with the differences and we find crimes with weapons are higher, much higher in any local with heavy ownership restrictions and that these same crimes are generally lower in places were the population can arm themselves.

*sigh*

She is asking for an accurate representation. Because guns are illegal in places where there are a lot of gun crimes only shows a link NOT a causal link. A better explanation than for saying that illegalizing guns increase crimes is saying that where there are lots of gun crimes, the government tends to make guns illegal . Hence the requirement for a before and after standard.
 
*sigh*

She is asking for an accurate representation. Because guns are illegal in places where there are a lot of gun crimes only shows a link NOT a causal link. A better explanation than for saying that illegalizing guns increase crimes is saying that where there are lots of gun crimes, the government tends to make guns illegal . Hence the requirement for a before and after standard.

Except you have no link to make that statement true either. Making guns illegal does not prevent a single criminal from getting a gun, since they almost NEVER buy them legally anyway. Talk about missing the boat.

One example of crime rate that changes in locals with self defense laws and easy gun ownership.... house break ins especially the kind where occupants may be home. Criminals do NOT want to get shot so do not conduct the risky crimes when the owners may be home and ARMED.
 
Except you have no link to make that statement true either. Making guns illegal does not prevent a single criminal from getting a gun, since they almost NEVER buy them legally anyway. Talk about missing the boat.

I have no evidence that localities tend to illegalize guns if there is lots of gun crime? How about common sense? Generally areas don't make things illegal unless there is a problem with them.

One example of crime rate that changes in locals with self defense laws and easy gun ownership.... house break ins especially the kind where occupants may be home. Criminals do NOT want to get shot so do not conduct the risky crimes when the owners may be home and ARMED.

Because criminals tend to research the laws and do lots of painstaking research before they go rob places? I bet they all have access to Westlaw too.
 
I have no evidence that localities tend to illegalize guns if there is lots of gun crime? How about common sense? Generally areas don't make things illegal unless there is a problem with them.



Because criminals tend to research the laws and do lots of painstaking research before they go rob places? I bet they all have access to Westlaw too.

Provide evidence of your claim. You have stated that crime caused cities like Washington DC to make guns completely illegal. Specifically gun crimes. You should have no problem using tha common sense and Mensa mind of yours to prove your contention.

As for criminals not breaking into houses where guns are plentiful and self defense is a right.... sure thing criminals are to stupid to connect the dots. That would be WHY such break ins go DOWN in places with such laws.
 
Would it be asking too much to simply demand enforcing laws that are currently on the books and taking guns away from criminals instead of making more laws that affect law abiding citizens?
 
Would it be asking too much to simply demand enforcing laws that are currently on the books and taking guns away from criminals instead of making more laws that affect law abiding citizens?
For normal people? Yes.
But the anti-gun loons want to disarm the normal people, and as such, the silliness you propose will never do.
 
Provide evidence of your claim. You have stated that crime caused cities like Washington DC to make guns completely illegal. Specifically gun crimes. You should have no problem using tha common sense and Mensa mind of yours to prove your contention.

Kindly theorize another reason why they made guns illegal, if it were not because of gun crime.

As for criminals not breaking into houses where guns are plentiful and self defense is a right.... sure thing criminals are to stupid to connect the dots. That would be WHY such break ins go DOWN in places with such laws.

Please provide evidence of a before and after comparison.
 
Ok, I'm not an expert on the topic, so I won't pretend to be. I am an avid gun owner. I live in South Texas and use them frequently. I would agree that gun laws are brought about in areas where they seem to have more gun crime, however, studies show that total crime-rates including gun crimes have increased once these gun laws have taken effect. Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them unprotected...considering the police typically are a reactionary and response force. The UK has experienced this along with several U.S. cities. I read the statistics the other day but I'm trying to remember where at, If I find the source I'll post it. Criminals will get their hands on guns whether they're illegal or not. Same way with marijuana, it's illegal, you can't go down to the local supermarket and get it (legally), but it still finds its way into peoples' hands.

From what I've heard, Texas has a real lenient policy when it comes to buying guns...however, in order for an establishment to sell a firearm, they must be register with the federal government. When an individual comes in to purchase a firearm, the seller is required to identify the FBI for a background check before the buyer is even allowed to purchase the gun. If the person's background checks out (not a criminal, no prior record, etc...) they can purchase the gun. If the person has a previous criminal history, the establishment will not sell them the gun. I used to sell firearms and I had to deny an old man from buying a gun for his grandson because he was Vietnam who (at one time) had Post Tramatic Stress. To me the system is set up just fine.

People are going to kill people whether they have guns or not. People have been killing people long before guns were invented. A gun is a piece of metal that cannot think for or function by itself. Sure, I'd agree that guns make it a little easier to kill, but killings killing no matter how hard or easy it is.
 
http://www.davekopel.com/2a/LawRev/lrnylstk.htm

This is a site that show a drop in the crime rate (because of gun laws) in certain countries.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/22/63817.shtml

This starts out slow, but lower down, it talks about Britains problems with gun control laws. The crime is increasing and it is virtually impossible for people to get guns legally.

http://media.www.dailylobo.com/medi...ss.With.Strict.Gun.Control.Laws-2849475.shtml

Here's another about gun control that I agree with. He mentions Virginia Tech.

--These people don't attack police stations or military installations because they will die quicker than you can say fatamop. They attack these schools because they know that no one will shoot back. Apparantly the "No Guns On Campus" sign didn't work, nor the gun law.
 
Just on that, good point about the police. The police will not protect anyone from anything - specifically. But the existence of the police makes it more likely that you won't suffer from violent crime.

I can go on with this (in a non-confrontational manner) if it's of interest because I find this a fascinating topic.

Maybe where you live. The existence of police means there's someone around to investigate what happened to you. Some consolation for the dead body and family.
 
Absolutely untrue... but feel free to prove that assertion using comparatives before and after gun restrictions were implemented.

If it is absolutely untrue, it would be encumbent on you to prove such. Otherwise, it's hard to dismiss the fact that the city that leads the US in hangun crimes outlaws ownership and/or posession -- Washington DC.
 
Criminals will get their hands on guns whether they're illegal or not. Same way with marijuana, it's illegal, you can't go down to the local supermarket and get it (legally), but it still finds its way into peoples' hands.

Outlaw guns, and only OUTLAWS will have them.
 

Forum List

Back
Top