Gun Control and the Inner City

[Cecilie1200]

Perhaps the OP would like to explain why he thinks it's a good idea to take away a persons right to self defense when he/she lives in an area prone to violence. Logically, the right to self defense wouldn't really be necessary if you live in a peaceful area, now would it?

And then perhaps he could explain how applying said ban on exercising one's right to self defense should apply to black people and why that would not be racist.

I'D like him to explain how he thinks he's realistically going to impose the ban on dangerous people who are likely to use handguns for crimes, given that said people, by definition, are unlikely to pay any attention to obeying the law.

I'd also like him to explain what it is about Cleveland - any part of it - that makes the law-abiding people (the ones who would be likely to obey such a ban) so scary that they need to be disarmed.

And don't even get me started on the "black people" issue.

 

[High_Gravity]

We should ban cars because alot of people die from car accidents every year, vehicles are dangerous for you. Please hand over your car keys to me.

 

[daveman]

That's all humor. I was playing off the OP's insanity that shotguns are a better idea, then I got carried away.

I figured -- no worries.

But you'll notice that no one has attempted to seriously answer the question.

that's b/c it's not about gun control, it's about ridding the Constitution of the 2nd amendment.

The facts that the places with the strictest gun laws have the highest gun crime is lost on gun grabbers. They don't want to go after criminals b/c that's harder to do than passing some bs law for headlines.

Yup. Feeling good about "doing something" is more important than actually doing something.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Alot of the guns used in violence in the inner cities are purchased illegally anyways, so a ban on hand guns will do nothing. Its not like a gang member goes to legally purchase a 9 MM to kill someone.

It's also not like a gang member is going to say, "Oh, it's illegal for me to have this handgun? My goodness, I'd best go turn this in to the police right away! I wouldn't want to break the law!"

 

[High_Gravity]

Perhaps the OP would like to explain why he thinks it's a good idea to take away a persons right to self defense when he/she lives in an area prone to violence. Logically, the right to self defense wouldn't really be necessary if you live in a peaceful area, now would it?

And then perhaps he could explain how applying said ban on exercising one's right to self defense should apply to black people and why that would not be racist.

I'D like him to explain how he thinks he's realistically going to impose the ban on dangerous people who are likely to use handguns for crimes, given that said people, by definition, are unlikely to pay any attention to obeying the law.

I'd also like him to explain what it is about Cleveland - any part of it - that makes the law-abiding people (the ones who would be likely to obey such a ban) so scary that they need to be disarmed.

And don't even get me started on the "black people" issue.

Most people who commit crimes with guns don't purchase them legally so restricting fire arms does nothing. Washington DC has very strict gun control laws, 2 NBA Players Delonte West and Gilbert Arenas got in trouble for having guns there. Yet, DC still has one of the highest crime rates, that just shows the gun grabbers case is a failure.

 

[MikeK]

I just wasted my time making an intelligent post and it turns out you are not only an idiot, but you a fucking batshit crazy racist idiot.

It's after 3PM, so he just got out of school. The best way to deal with adolescent time and space wasters is your Ignore list. They, along with the abusive shit-talkers, are effectively silenced by just adding their name to that list.

If you ignore everyone like that, there will be no one to chat with on this board. And then how will you teach them anything?

That's true -- if you Ignore everyone, which is an absurd prospect.

I have about eight names on my Ignore list, each of which represents a belligerent adolescent or an abusive creep who visits here to do what he hasn't the balls to do face-to-face. Ignoring these cyphers is like stepping over dogshit on a sidewalk rather than stepping in it. The end result is less wasted time, less wasted space and much less annoyance.

 

[Sallow]

I am not saying that all your rural folks need to have your guns pried from your cold dead hands, but it’s time to ban handguns within the city limits of the US’s major cities. Handguns serve no purpose but to kill other people, and don’t try that home protection crap, a shotgun works just as well if not better for home protection. Handguns are the number one killer of youth in our major cities and it’s time we stop this insanity, really how many more people have to die?

What about people who only have one hand?

Guns are a tool, and any tool can be misused. You cannot define the purpose of a tool to be one thing in a blatant attempt to remove the right of an individual to make his own choices. Believe it or not, the primary purpose of any tool is defined by the person that uses it.

A saw is intended to cut, but some people see them as musical instruments, and others see them as art. Should we ban saws because some people use them to break the law?

FYI, you should really drop you talking point about guns being the leading cause of death for anyone. The leading cause of death is, and probably will remain, automobile accidents, with firearms, at best, 2nd.

Death Statistics Tables

Those numbers cannot be trusted.

N.R.A. Stymies Firearms Research, Scientists Say
By MICHAEL LUO
Published: January 25, 2011
In the wake of the shootings in Tucson, the familiar questions inevitably resurfaced: Are communities where more people carry guns safer or less safe? Does the availability of high-capacity magazines increase deaths? Do more rigorous background checks make a difference?

The reality is that even these and other basic questions cannot be fully answered, because not enough research has been done. And there is a reason for that. Scientists in the field and former officials with the government agency that used to finance the great bulk of this research say the influence of the National Rife Association has all but choked off money for such work.

“We’ve been stopped from answering the basic questions,” said Mark Rosenberg, former director of the National Center for Injury Control and Prevention, part of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which was for about a decade the leading source of financing for firearms research.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=1&ref=us&pagewanted=all

 

[Sallow]

Perhaps the OP would like to explain why he thinks it's a good idea to take away a persons right to self defense when he/she lives in an area prone to violence. Logically, the right to self defense wouldn't really be necessary if you live in a peaceful area, now would it?

And then perhaps he could explain how applying said ban on exercising one's right to self defense should apply to black people and why that would not be racist.

I'D like him to explain how he thinks he's realistically going to impose the ban on dangerous people who are likely to use handguns for crimes, given that said people, by definition, are unlikely to pay any attention to obeying the law.

I'd also like him to explain what it is about Cleveland - any part of it - that makes the law-abiding people (the ones who would be likely to obey such a ban) so scary that they need to be disarmed.

And don't even get me started on the "black people" issue.

Most people who commit crimes with guns don't purchase them legally so restricting fire arms does nothing. Washington DC has very strict gun control laws, 2 NBA Players Delonte West and Gilbert Arenas got in trouble for having guns there. Yet, DC still has one of the highest crime rates, that just shows the gun grabbers case is a failure.

That's somewhat untrue.

Most guns in crimes committed in NYC came from Virginia. Bloomberg threatened to sue the state's gun shops..and the flow of guns to NYC "magically" dissipated.

 

[MikeK]

I can guarantee you the Latin Kings and Gangster Disciples don't go down to the local gun store to buy hand guns when they commit crimes, Washington DC has very strict gun laws and they still have a crime rate. Making guns illegal just takes away the average persons ability to protect themselves from these gangsters and crime rates actually go up, banning hand guns is a failure.

You're quite right. Illegal guns move in the same channels as do illegal drugs, which we know by now simply cannot be controlled.

 

[Sallow]

I can guarantee you the Latin Kings and Gangster Disciples don't go down to the local gun store to buy hand guns when they commit crimes, Washington DC has very strict gun laws and they still have a crime rate. Making guns illegal just takes away the average persons ability to protect themselves from these gangsters and crime rates actually go up, banning hand guns is a failure.

You're quite right. Illegal guns move in the same channels as do illegal drugs, which we know by now simply cannot be controlled.

No they don't.

Most guns are initially sold legally.

 

[High_Gravity]

I'D like him to explain how he thinks he's realistically going to impose the ban on dangerous people who are likely to use handguns for crimes, given that said people, by definition, are unlikely to pay any attention to obeying the law.

I'd also like him to explain what it is about Cleveland - any part of it - that makes the law-abiding people (the ones who would be likely to obey such a ban) so scary that they need to be disarmed.

And don't even get me started on the "black people" issue.

Most people who commit crimes with guns don't purchase them legally so restricting fire arms does nothing. Washington DC has very strict gun control laws, 2 NBA Players Delonte West and Gilbert Arenas got in trouble for having guns there. Yet, DC still has one of the highest crime rates, that just shows the gun grabbers case is a failure.

That's somewhat untrue.

Most guns in crimes committed in NYC came from Virginia. Bloomberg threatened to sue the state's gun shops..and the flow of guns to NYC "magically" dissipated.

Crime has gone down in New York, I don't even think they are on the top 10 list anymore.

 

[High_Gravity]

I can guarantee you the Latin Kings and Gangster Disciples don't go down to the local gun store to buy hand guns when they commit crimes, Washington DC has very strict gun laws and they still have a crime rate. Making guns illegal just takes away the average persons ability to protect themselves from these gangsters and crime rates actually go up, banning hand guns is a failure.

You're quite right. Illegal guns move in the same channels as do illegal drugs, which we know by now simply cannot be controlled.

No they don't.

Most guns are initially sold legally.

Alot of Mexican gangsters don't even buy their guns from the USA.

 

[syrenn]

I am not saying that all your rural folks need to have your guns pried from your cold dead hands, but it’s time to ban handguns within the city limits of the US’s major cities. Handguns serve no purpose but to kill other people, and don’t try that home protection crap, a shotgun works just as well if not better for home protection. Handguns are the number one killer of youth in our major cities and it’s time we stop this insanity, really how many more people have to die?

How about this. Give them all guns. Take them to a field and let them shoot it out to the death. Last one standing wins. Problem solved. All the criminal hand gun totting city dwellers are dead.

Its not the guns, its the people with the guns. You need criminal control not gun control. Banning the criminals would be a better solution then banning the guns.

 

[signelect]

Avatar puts forth good logic. Why are guns a problem in the cites? Because people in the cites commit a lot of crimes. If everyone left everone else and their things alone it is not a problem. When you come to my house to take my things, that is a problem for both of us. I am going to have to defend my property, explain to the police why you are lying in my house messing up the carpet. You won't be explaining anything to anyone. Obey the laws we have and there is not need for this topic.

 

[MikeK]

Well then I guess we will just have to ban them harder.

As hard as we ban illegal drugs? How much harder can it get?

I say shut down all production of weapons for non-military personel.

And we'll start seeing more illegal Makarov handguns (for one foreign brand) smuggled into the U.S. via the same channels as illegal drugs.

Eventually the gangs will run outta bullets and have to use knives, axes or machettes to rob people.

No. What that will achieve is to introduce everyone who owns a reloading press (many millions) into a potentially lucrative bootlegging opportunity. The only thing prohibiting ammo will do is elevate the price of ammo -- just like the price of illegal drugs.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I am not saying that all your rural folks need to have your guns pried from your cold dead hands, but it’s time to ban handguns within the city limits of the US’s major cities. Handguns serve no purpose but to kill other people, and don’t try that home protection crap, a shotgun works just as well if not better for home protection. Handguns are the number one killer of youth in our major cities and it’s time we stop this insanity, really how many more people have to die?

How about this. Give them all guns. Take them to a field and let them shoot it out to the death. Last one standing wins. Problem solved. All the criminal hand gun totting city dwellers are dead.

Its not the guns, its the people with the guns. You need criminal control not gun control. Banning the criminals would be a better solution then banning the guns.

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT!!

We should have a special place to keep all criminals. Need a catchy name though.

Jail? no, that's taken

PRISON! crud, that's taken to.

People that dont obey the law containment center. meh, too long.


Help me out here people, Ima outta good ideas.

 

[daveman]

I am not saying that all your rural folks need to have your guns pried from your cold dead hands, but it’s time to ban handguns within the city limits of the US’s major cities. Handguns serve no purpose but to kill other people, and don’t try that home protection crap, a shotgun works just as well if not better for home protection. Handguns are the number one killer of youth in our major cities and it’s time we stop this insanity, really how many more people have to die?

How about this. Give them all guns. Take them to a field and let them shoot it out to the death. Last one standing wins. Problem solved. All the criminal hand gun totting city dwellers are dead.

Its not the guns, its the people with the guns. You need criminal control not gun control. Banning the criminals would be a better solution then banning the guns.

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT!!

We should have a special place to keep all criminals. Need a catchy name though.

Jail? no, that's taken

PRISON! crud, that's taken to.

People that dont obey the law containment center. meh, too long.


Help me out here people, Ima outta good ideas.

How about "Detroit"?

 

[MikeK]

Most guns are initially sold legally.

Are you saying that everyone who possesses an illegal gun purchased it via legal channels, i.e., from a lawfully licensed gun dealer?

 

[Sallow]

I am not saying that all your rural folks need to have your guns pried from your cold dead hands, but it’s time to ban handguns within the city limits of the US’s major cities. Handguns serve no purpose but to kill other people, and don’t try that home protection crap, a shotgun works just as well if not better for home protection. Handguns are the number one killer of youth in our major cities and it’s time we stop this insanity, really how many more people have to die?

How about this. Give them all guns. Take them to a field and let them shoot it out to the death. Last one standing wins. Problem solved. All the criminal hand gun totting city dwellers are dead.

Its not the guns, its the people with the guns. You need criminal control not gun control. Banning the criminals would be a better solution then banning the guns.

Yeah..great idea.

More likely they would shoot the people that gave them the guns..commandeer their vehicles and start a crime organization at the nearest population center.

 

[High_Gravity]

Most guns are initially sold legally.

Are you saying that everyone who possesses an illegal gun purchased it via legal channels, i.e., from a lawfully licensed gun dealer?

I think what hes saying is some guns that are bought illegally were at one time bought from a legal gun store, which is true. However, alot of criminals nowadays buy their guns from sources who get their guns from outside the country.