namelesstavern.net

The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England's firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

This sea change in English crime followed a sea change in government policies. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the proposition that people don't need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It also will protect their neighbors: Police advise those who witness a crime to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it.


The whole thing can be read at the following.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html

Banning handguns will produce the exact opposite of what many think it will

Remember, the shooter's gun's serial numbers were filed off. Anyone can get a gun, for a price. Chances are the people that want them, are not going to use them for defensive purposes, only offensive.

Very objective poll.

Amazingly, another option has appeared. I blame the board gremlins

how are real statistics propaganda you idiot? No, i dont like guns. I dont own a gun, Ive shot a gun once at a gun range tho.

Stats are propaganda...

If some jackass broke into your home and pointed a gun at you in your bedroom while you are next to your wife, what are you gonna do, shoot him with a chuck norris stare?

I see these retarded ass home security system commercials. "I think someones in my home!" " Stay Put Maam, well be there in 20 minutes!"

People are dumb, there are alot of people, and some of them do really stupid shit. Do you want to be the victim? Chances are you wont be shot by someone who legally owns a firearm. Chances are you will be shot by some crazy person with a gun that isnt registerd. If the only people with guns are the ones who shouldnt have them, guess whats gonna happen.

the flaw in this argument is that they are saying that the lack of hand guns is the sole reason that crime is climbing, and scatillac is extrapolating that the same situation would happen if hand guns were banned in the states. There are so many other factors involved in crime rates, it's impossible to say that if everybody was armed, the situation would be 1000 times worse and london would be in a state of anarchy. This study was also done a few years ago and violent crime rates have dropped sharply from 1995 to 2006 while the ban is still in place.

If you make it harder to get guns, if you make it illegal to own, the not only is it more trouble, more expensive, and harder to get, but you also have an additional chance of catching any potential thief, murderer or criminal that is planning on using a hand gun.

Also while I'm against all kinds of guns, it is also important to point out that there is a difference between hand guns and any guns. Rifles, shotguns and the like can be used for other purposes then killing people, you can hunt with them, and still use it to protect your home. I don't have the statistics on hand, but I've read before that per capita, canadians have more fire arms than americans, but the difference is that they're all mostly hunting tools. You're not going to sneak around easily with a shotgun trying to ambush somebody.

lyion wrote:Amazingly, another option has appeared. I blame the board gremlins

If you're going to bash the NRA how about you throw up another option regarding the Brady Campaign and all the bullshit statistics they claim?

Sure, let me know what you want up there, and I'll add it.

btw there is also a HUGE difference between hard statistics (which were not provided) and a slanted interpretation of the statistics where the study's author has an obviously biased stance. You can't say for example that canada has less hand guns, so it has less crime, it's not that simple, but you also can't say, less guns in the uk means more crime. The biggest factor in crime rates is probably poverty which isn't related to guns at all

Tuggan wrote:

lyion wrote:Amazingly, another option has appeared. I blame the board gremlins

If you're going to bash the NRA how about you throw up another option regarding the Brady Campaign and all the bullshit statistics they claim?

STFU white trash

Snero wrote:btw there is also a HUGE difference between hard statistics (which were not provided) and a slanted interpretation of the statistics where the study's author has an obviously biased stance. You can't say for example that canada has less hand guns, so it has less crime, it's not that simple, but you also can't say, less guns in the uk means more crime. The biggest factor in crime rates is probably poverty which isn't related to guns at all

You don't believe in criminal empowerment? As in it's not real?

You don't think one that makes a living by robbing and stealing from others might be slightly more apprehensive to do so in say small town Wyoming where you know damn well just about everyone owns a firearm... versus say downtown New York where the gun laws are ridiculous?

no I dont, there are other ways around things. I would be a lot more nervous about breaking into a house in NY considering the odds are that most places have an alarm system and I would get busted, where as in wyoming all i would have to do is stake the place out, wait until the people are gone and help myself. I would generally think anybody that wants to rob would want to avoid any kind of human contact

Im afraid you give way too much credit to the criminal element. People arent mugged? Car jacking is just a myth? Home invasions dont happen with people home?

I am going to stray for a moment-mini "araby thread" derail

I dreamt a week or so ago about sleeping on the front porch of a house I did not know. There were three doors, all screen-type doors. In the dream, I had the knowledge that something could come inside, whether or not I locked the doors. I had the choice to lock the doors, but it would not matter, since I also had the knowledge that it would still come inside, if it were coming.

In my dream, I chose to leave the doors unlocked.

Back on topic-I know that if it's coming, it's coming. Why guns though? They don't make sense.

i dont think the possibility of someone having a gun is all that much of a deterent. convenience stores in shitty neighborhoods get robbed all the time, even the ones with shotguns AND cameras behind the counter. the majority of criminals are just stupid and get dangerous when desperate. arming even more people just makes guns that much easier to get ahold of when the going gets rough.

generally i would think that crime falls in one of two categories, planned out crime and spur of the moment.

In the first, the criminals would do everything they can do avoid human contact while perpetrating whatever they're doing. In the second, they're not thinking clearly and wouldn't think about the potential consequences. The very reason why long prison sentences doesn't work as a deterrent is the same reason why arming the population wouldn't work

Snero wrote:generally i would think that crime falls in one of two categories, planned out crime and spur of the moment.

In the first, the criminals would do everything they can do avoid human contact while perpetrating whatever they're doing. In the second, they're not thinking clearly and wouldn't think about the potential consequences. The very reason why long prison sentences doesn't work as a deterrent is the same reason why arming the population wouldn't work

what about secondary man slaughter you can't leave that out

haha! (from the *other* board)

Some statistics for Zanchief

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun
control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to
defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5
million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945,
A total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend
Themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20
Million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981,
100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979,
300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In summation:

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th
Century because of gun control: 56 million.

Guns don't kill people, Gun Control kills people.




This is a tiny violin because now you can cry propaganda 8)

The problem with people here in the U.S. is they take their life for granted and do not possess the desire to protect it themselves and instead rely others to do it for them.

The population is too comfortable and with that comes weakness and the lack of will to defend one's self.

Oh, please, Lueyen. Drawing a causal link between gun control and genocides is absurd. Oh yes, I'm sure that an average russian could have stopped himself being arrested by Stalin's secret police because he happened to have a rifle in his closet.

Fucking bullshit.

You're normally not guilty of such ludicrous leaps of pseudo-logic, I'm thoroughly disappointed in you.

-Arlos

arlos wrote:Oh, please, Lueyen. Drawing a causal link between gun control and genocides is absurd. Oh yes, I'm sure that an average russian could have stopped himself being arrested by Stalin's secret police because he happened to have a rifle in his closet.

Fucking bullshit.

You're normally not guilty of such ludicrous leaps of pseudo-logic, I'm thoroughly disappointed in you.

-Arlos

You missed the fine print

Harrison wrote:The problem with people here in the U.S. is they take their life for granted and do not possess the desire to protect it themselves and instead rely others to do it for them..

Therein lies the crux of the problem. I for one do NOT want to be taken care of by the government. I don't NEED the government to ensure I am successful or to "protect" me, or for that matter to decide what's good and what's bad for me.

If you don't think taking guns away from the public is a bad thing, if you don't think our power hungry government isn't drooling over the idea an unarmed public - you're kidding yourself. Democrat or Republican... they'd love nothing more than to turn this country into a dictatorship.

I am surprised that with the number of reasonably intelligent posters here, no one is picking up on what’s going on. A PSYCHO goes off on a shooting spree – and rather than discussing who dropped the ball and what should have been done BEFORE hand to institutionalize and treat the guy – the media turns it into a gun control issue.

I support the Constitution and I support a person’s right to bare arms. However, make no mistake… I FULLY support the instituting of tougher restrictions on obtaining a hand gun. Some ideas?

Well for one, most states require the completion of a hunter safety course before you can purchase a license. Why is not being required for purchasing a hand gun? You want to buy a pistol? Fine – after you complete the course on gun safety and responsibility. After you’ve been subjected to a full background check. Etc… etc…

What I do NOT support is giving the Imperial Federal Government the power to disarm its citizens. Our government needs LESS power over our lives… not MORE.

The whole issue of gun control isn't about "saving lives" - it's about power. At least in the eyes of the fed. gov.

Diekan wrote:I support the Constitution and I support a person’s right to bare arms.

Sorry ><

ban video games
ban all types of suggestive music
ban handguns

Let's keep blaming everyone and everything except for the crazy fuck(s) behind the gun(s), this may come as a complete shock, but no one anywhere is 100% safe and never will be, ever. Shit happens, believe it or not, sure there can be some preventative measures but do people honestly believe that banning handguns would help anything? Hearing people say that is the most hilarious thing ever, because we all know that every shooting thats ever happened was the cause of some crazy fuck pulling the trigger of a licensed gun that he surely didn't come into possession of illegally.