Gun Control

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnusVS

The statistic discussed in this thread, seems to show some correlation.

---

And other countries high possession rate and low crime rate shows no correlation. So, pretending that the US and UK are the only statistics to look at is not representative of a correlation using all relevant data. By the logic of just going by the US and UK, you could say that a single shooting event shows a correlation that guns must be the cause of all murder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnusVS

When it comes to Canada, do you think there can more hunting rifles and less hand guns?

---

I'm not sure. I'm also not sure why that would matter? According to the behavior aspect of the theories thrown out here, existence of guns cause crime because people just get mad and lose control. Are you saying that criminals object to using rifles for their crimes? do you think "young kids" or "teenagers" have no interest in rifles but do in handguns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

no on the waiting period. it has not been shown to have a positive effect.

---

Surely a waiting period would serve two purposes: enable a comprehensive background check, and allow a "cooling off" period - even if debatable it's not the main purpose anyway.

Quote:

---

no on the number of guns. not sure what the point of that would be.

---

Hmmm.... Though what is the point of allowing unlimited firearms? After the first, oh, ten or so, would you not wonder why that creapy guy down the road is having boxes of guns delivered daily? I don't know, even for a gun "nut", I would figure 10 guns was a pretty reasonable number. With those requiring more for "special purposes" able to apply for permission?

Quote:

---

the calibre. mostly not. but, obviously, there should be some line drawn when it comes to bazookas, rocket launchers, etc. that should be decided by the state.

---

How big a gun do you need to "protect" the family?
Once you're agreeing to any kind of calibre, then there is room for debate to what level.

you know Switzerland has about 60% of the murders that the u.k. does.. which has only 33% of the murders that the u.s. does.

Clearly the u.s. and the u.k. need to have 20% of the households armed with fully automatic assault rifles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

Actually, the common factor is more often than not anyone with a viewpoint outside the "norm" in here. Observed this behaviour in threads I've had nadda to do with, and goes back over a number of years with folk who don't post here no more for that very reason.

So who was it that came out with the following merely due to a similar thread o discussion that has happened the last page or so:

"All of you.....**** it.....turds......pointing a finger at us need to stand down."

Yep, all my fault I guess for the thread spiralling into the abyss. :rolleyes:



(sorry TGLG, that might derail our conversation a little. Apologies, just in the mood to let the devil out today and not let sleeping dogs lie...)

---

Politics aside.....mine, yours, or anyone else's.....follow the rules of Flash Kit or be gone. It's simple. Keep your arguments to topics and not attacking members as you have with me. Each and every time you have quoted me it has been to attack me. The fact of the matter is you can do nothing. Nada! Zip! Nil! Not one damn thing. I can vote, I can change things, I can shape the world. What can you do? Nada! Zip! Nil! Not one damn thing. Oh wait, you can ***** like a whiney little child, I almost forgot. Even your "military" is a joke. And your country tops the world homicide rate, including second in firearms, and FIRST in all others. Looks like your time would be better spent cleaning up your own country than worrying about mine. </defendingLikeDavo>

Learn a lesson here, now, or you will be gone. Have you opinion, spew your dislike for my country, but follow the damn rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

IF it came to pass that the apparent majority got their way, what "tighter" gun laws would you suggest?

---

1 month wait. criminal background check. I still would not implement a medical background check though.. to much of a slippery slope. If i was ell supremo president I would consider giving up handguns for true assault rifles.

but I don't think either would have any real effect on gun crimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pol...United_Kingdom

Figures here show a rise and then a fall. And some of the numbers quoted per year are so small that annual rises and falls in percentage seem much higher than in real numbers.

Between 1998/99 and 2005/06, there have been only two fatal shootings of police officers in England and Wales. Over the same period there were 107 non-fatal shootings of police officers - an average of just 9.7 per year.

And a view through the history of gun control on that page suggest that gun laws were well and truly in place for many types well before the 1997 handgun ban.

---

Quote:

---

Since 1998 number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales has more than doubled.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

And other countries high possession rate and low crime rate shows no correlation. So, pretending that the US and UK are the only statistics to look at is not representative of a correlation using all relevant data. By the logic of just going by the US and UK, you could say that a single shooting event shows a correlation that guns must be the cause of all murder.

---

I think the main thing that many outside the US find strange (though with politics as it is maybe not so much) is that despite the HUGE gun violence issues that the US has, serious review of gun laws in an attempt to at least try something just hasn't really occurred. I mean, it's one thing to look at the stats and point out a lack of correlation about any argument someone is making from other countries, but surely one day - some day - something needs to be tried?

I think that's the main thing that boggles most of us outside the US, the lack of trying something to seriously address the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EVP

I can shape the world.

---

Correction, you can help shape America, not the world.
However after 7 pages I agree this threads gone way beyond pointless, people are falling out and writing obscene stuff in their footers ;) A little thread on Flashkit isn't going to change American politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

And other countries high possession rate and low crime rate shows no correlation. So, pretending that the US and UK are the only statistics to look at is not representative of a correlation using all relevant data.

---

Except from Canada, there seems to be a general tendency with lower murder rates and less guns. But of course, there's probably many factors (including mental health care).

I would say it's easier to kill (many) people if you have an uzi or automatic handgun than if you have a hunting rifle that you have to reload every 2nd shot.

But I'm going to bed now. Good night and don't write to much while I'm asleep!;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

I think that's the main thing that boggles most of us outside the US, the lack of trying something to seriously address the issue.

---

the thing that boggles me is that people seem to think guns are making people kill each other.

Gun laws have shown not to have any effect on murder rates. So why keep going down that path? Look at the u.s. over a 100 year period and look at what is happening when murder rates climb and fall. It has nothing to do with guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EVPohovich

Learn a lesson here, now, or you will be gone. Have you opinion, spew your dislike for my country, but follow the damn rules.

---

So I trust you will follow those rules too in the future?

You didn't in that post for example.

I have no qualms following the stated rules and guidelines, but do have some issue when Mods put in place to inforce said rules and guidelines don't actually follow them themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tidenburg

people are falling out and writing obscene stuff in their footers ;)

---

Merely the little power I have as a mere user rather than a Mod. Far more "obscene" stuff a few pages back, and still on this page too now unfortunately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

Since 1998 number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales has more than doubled.

---

In 2005/06, 87% of such injuries were defined as "slight," which includes the use of firearms as a threat only.

30-15. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TallGuyLittleCar

the thing that boggles me is that people seem to think guns are making people kill each other.

---

Fair enough, you have as much right to be "boggled" as we do.

Oh, sorry, and I did almost miss THIS little gem:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EVPohovich

Even your "military" is a joke. And your country tops the world homicide rate, including second in firearms, and FIRST in all others. Looks like your time would be better spent cleaning up your own country than worrying about mine. </defendingLikeDavo>

---

So what country exactly do you think I come from?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tidenburg

Correction, you can help shape America, not the world.
However after 7 pages I agree this threads gone way beyond pointless, people are falling out and writing obscene stuff in their footers ;) A little thread on Flashkit isn't going to change American politics.

---

Although I'm not a "You'd better worship America because it's greater than you" kind of person, America, as the most powerful nation in the world, has a big impact and precedent on other nations. And if you can help control the shark, you can help control the krill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/1403/81/

---

Not sure if anyone has commented on this article yet, haven't read the last few pages but...

Dave, it's a nice idea in theory but doesn't make much sense when you think about it.

You need to go through all the driving tests, learner's permit etc.. for driving a car to prove that you CAN drive a car, that's pretty much it. So if the same was applied to gun laws, you'd be taking test to prove that you are ABLE to use a gun.

The fact that you would be "licensed" to be able to use a gun doesn't prevent you from using that gun to kill someone, it just proves you know how to shoot. I think the VT shooter would have passed a supposed gun "license" test with flying colors, he was obviously a very good shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

Merely the little power I have as a mere user rather than a Mod. Far more "obscene" stuff a few pages back, and still on this page too now unfortunately.

---

yeah i did that like 8 months ago. then i grew up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

So I trust you will follow those rules too in the future?

You didn't in that post for example.

I have no qualms following the stated rules and guidelines, but do have some issue when Mods put in place to inforce said rules and guidelines don't actually follow them themselves.

---

Do not presume to tell me my position here at Flash Kit. That was me doing to you what you have done most of this thread (and a few recent others). Would you look at a Highway Patrol Officer and say "We'll you had to speed to catch me..."? No, As I have stated before, follow the rules, that's from me to you, a SuperModerator to a Member.

And you also seem to forget about the back to back to back (and so on) postings, another activity looked down upon here on this Forum.

Notice how all the other wide and varying soapbox shouters are not getting my attention? That should tell you something.

Your opinions are welcome, your attitude is not. Get with the program or the program will get along without you. This is the last warning, from here on out my action will be swift.


~EVP

Holy cow! The "Maximum Quote Per Thread" alarm just went off! :yikes: Scared the crap out of me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Planet

Holy cow! The "Maximum Quote Per Thread" alarm just went off! :yikes: Scared the crap out of me.

---

just checking to see if there really is a maximum number of quotes per thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TallGuyLittleCar

just checking to see if there really is a maximum number of quotes per thread.

---

That is a good idea.

vB need to have a max quoted words option so that anything more than said amount gets changed to "this sentence is one word over ... max"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visionray

Dave, it's a nice idea in theory but doesn't make much sense when you think about it.

You need to go through all the driving tests, learner's permit etc.. for driving a car to prove that you CAN drive a car, that's pretty much it. So if the same was applied to gun laws, you'd be taking test to prove that you are ABLE to use a gun.

The fact that you would be "licensed" to be able to use a gun doesn't prevent you from using that gun to kill someone, it just proves you know how to shoot. I think the VT shooter would have passed a supposed gun "license" test with flying colors, he was obviously a very good shot.

---

No, it doesn't stop you from using a gun to kill someone. Just as driver's licenses don't stop drivers killing people. But it does reduce the numbers.

Anyway, as I said, the logic seems sound even if you or others don't agree with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EVPohovich

Do not presume to tell me my position here at Flash Kit. That was me doing to you what you have done most of this thread (and a few recent others). Would you look at a Highway Patrol Officer and say "We'll you had to speed to catch me..."? No, As I have stated before, follow the rules, that's from me to you, a SuperModerator to a Member.

Your opinions are welcome, your attitude is not. Get with the program or the program will get along without you. This is the last warning, from here on out my action will be swift.


~EVP

---

Excuse me? If I am being accused of something by someone who is doing exactly the same thing, then "super" moderator or Highay Patrol officer I will certainly point out the discrepancy that is existing. Highway Patrol Officers have to abide by certain rules and laws just like anybody else, and the public also have avenues to protect them from abuse by such officers. I'm sure you also have guidelines you're expected to follow. You'll have to point me to the part where Mods are allowed to abuse and name call someone to enforce their position.

Quote:

---

Notice how all the other wide and varying soapbox shouters are not getting my attention? That should tell you something.

---

Which probably has more to do with the fact that I'm standing up for myself and not backing down. At the moment, you seem to be on the biggest soap box around.

Quote:

---

And you also seem to forget about the back to back to back (and so on) postings, another activity looked down upon here on this Forum.

---

So I'm polite enough to attempt to address as many people's points as I can when having a discussion and that's a bad thing? Okay, next time I'll try to hang around until someone else posts between time, my apologies in advance to anyone if you think I'm ignoring your post/question.

Quote:

---

No, As I have stated before, follow the rules, that's from me to you, a SuperModerator to a Member.

---

And I'll ask you as I have been polite enough and taken the time enough to ask others (both in this thread and previously), and to give credit where it's due the only one who has regularly bothered to do so is Gerbick, and ask for you to point out where I have done anything that is against the Flashkit rules?

You don't like my point of view? Cool, I don't care, there are many people's points of view on this board I don't like, but I don't lose any sleep over it and it's not against the rules to hold a point of view someone doesn't like. Howver as for following/breaking rules, well that should be fairly easy to show.

I added a comment as satire in my footer (not concerned who found it funny or not, but very clearly satire) which was amended when requested. So apart from that - and that was well after the blow up in this thread - I would really, dearly love you to direct my attention to where I have broken Flashkit rules? I could have a field day doing it from a few comments directed at me in this thread if you would desire, but let's just start with you backing up your claim first. It's called evidence, something a Highway Patrol Officer also has to produce. And it's even easier here, it's all in writing, so no "my word against your word" scenario.

-----

Is kind of reminding my of a Dilbert cartoon at the moment:

Dilbert: "Don't lax gun laws result in more deaths?"
Manager 1: "US basher"
Manager 2: "Why you little "*!*£$%$£"%^^&!!!"
Manager 3: "Turd!"
Manager 3: "Okay Dilbert, you're out of here for breaking the rules!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

No, it doesn't stop you from using a gun to kill someone. Just as driver's licenses don't stop drivers killing people. But it does reduce the numbers.

Anyway, as I said, the logic seems sound even if you or others don't agree with it.

---

You're forgetting to factor in other variables of owning a license... such as drunk driving. Or driving under the influence of drugs.

Having a license to a gun - which I went to classes in three states, licensed in three states, paid fees in three states all due to moving around - does not equate control upfront.

It just starts the knowledge process. Then it's up to the individual to be responsible.

As it stands, a criminal will not be "responsible"... they will do basically what criminals do. Same for the insane.

In the case of the Virginia Tech shootings, that's clearly a madman if you've seen his video diatribes.

Gun control as it stands in the US is a bad subject. The Federal laws layout a framework. The states implement that framework and can augment rules within that framework. If there's a suggested waiting period between application to buy a gun and when you can actually own it, the state will say that 72 hours is ok. Or it might say 7 days. Or the state might declare there's no waiting period with proper identification.

Virginia has "lax" gun laws. But in this case, the guns were purchased last month. So a waiting period would not have solved anything. It would not have delayed this waiting time bomb.

It just prolonged this years ongoing process of creating this person into what he became.

The amount of restrictions on guns in the US is higher now than ever. Yet, gun laws are the first to come into blame. The problem is lower than that. Washington DC outlawed guns... but still they exist there.

Gun laws in Australia are tough... but they don't exactly stop crime.

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/armed_robbery.jpg
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/robbery.jpg

Nor does it stop armed robbery/shootings. It may just limit the ability for immediately escalated violence involving guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

Excuse me? If I am being accused of something by someone who is doing exactly the same thing, then "super" moderator

---

What are you being accused of... be specific.

It's quite funny that you're being "accused" of something, yet not specific in what it was; yet you continue to drag my name into things when I've not addressed you for over two pages.

First the footer, now this post.

So be specific.

Quote:

---

You'll have to point me to the part where Mods are allowed to abuse and name call someone to enforce their position.

---

I've done no such thing. I'm addressing you because my name was used in your post; therefore denoting that I'm somewhere in the audience/direction of this post.

Quote:

---

Howver as for following/breaking rules, well that should be fairly easy to show.

---

You misspelled "However"... sorry. Old habits die hard.

Quote:

---

I added a comment as satire in my footer (not concerned who found it funny or not, but very clearly satire) which was amended when requested.

---

Satire is one thing. You've taken my verbiage and deflected it to being used for a non-argument that's remained quite circular and hasn't added to anything in the thread. I didn't resort to placing you in my footer; when honestly I didn't expand upon the truth as you taken the liberty of doing so.

Quote:

---

I would really, dearly love you to direct my attention to where I have broken Flashkit rules?

---

And you're the one that once reported an user for using your name once in a thread in a manner that you did not like. I simply requested that you remove my name; which you did. Without an apology, nor explanation until now.

Satire is usually funny. Not unless you're the modern Saturday Night Live cast.

Quote:

---

...you backing up your claim first. It's called evidence, something a Highway Patrol Officer also has to produce. And it's even easier here, it's all in writing, so no "my word against your word" scenario.

---

Same for you too buddy boy.

I never said anything about "US Hate"... in fact, it wasn't a factor until your post.

Here's my original post:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gerbick

It's really sad that I'm starting to believe that some members are here only to point out what's wrong with the world and offer no sympathy in anything other than esoteric situations where their efforts end up being drops of hope in a desert of futility just to say they've done something.

It's so easy to be a critic and never fully commit to anything other than a nebulous "point" that really just can be relegated to a simplified "finger point" and an evasive language that really answers nothing, solves nothing, says nothing.

---

Please point out where I said "US Hate"... as you decided to point out in your post where you quoted me and stated as such:

Quote:

---

You've just made your point very well.

I don't see anyone making any suggestions they hate the US. I don't see anyone balking at discussing any issues in their own countries. All I did see (before the usual defensive posturing) was a discussion about an issue that was very relevant due to an unfortunate recent event in the US.

Next time we have some event in Australia that could have been influenced by something - and that anyone here is actually interested in discussing - you'll find me all ears, and not taking any offense at anyone's researched ideas or suggestions, even if they oppose mine (which, if critical of the Australian government, is highly unlikely).

Actually gerbick, this time you can take credit: Until your post (closely followed by EVPohovich's) I thought this discussion about a very passionate and controversial issue was proceeding very civilly, despite people's differing and sometimes opposing viewpoints. Well done old chap!

---

Emphasis is mine. I didn't say "US hate". Yet you quoted me and used it... first time in the thread really.

Please don't introduce that manner of argument and display it "back" to me when I never said it... and you've yet to specify why you quoted me and said that.

As it stands, you remain that liar that I stated earlier. I never said it and I've remained quite civil; yet you continue to use my name in your footer, and in posts after I've stopped responding to you.

And here's my official request: Please stop it. I find it nigh-harassment. And by definition, harassment is unwanted attention. Please refrain from using my name in a manner that is not befitting of what I've stated.

And if you don't agree with that, that's pretty much a paraphrase of when you complained about Tony - XU1 - using your name once before.

Thank you in advance, have a good day old chap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheOriginalFlashDavo

Is kind of reminding my of a Dilbert cartoon at the moment:

Dilbert: "Don't lax gun laws result in more deaths?"
Manager 1: not really
dilbert: heres a link to some random stats about the US as a whole
Manager 3: that really doesnt show anything without comparing it to other things
dilbert: heres that same link see more deaths
manager 2: yeah but your not looking at specific states, Dc has very strict laws, and more deaths with guns then any other state
dilbert: heres a link that shows the us has more gun deaths then the uk
manager 3: your not listening your like a robot
dilbert: you called me a robot im gonna put a big thing in my footer that says your all stupid
manager 4: thats fine as long as you dont put our names in
dilbert: help help im being repressed

---

fixed to show the cartoon but i used our discussion here.

http://www.drudge.com/news/93463/sel...itzerland#more


i do believe thats checkmate.

Oh come on silverx2. I was finally going to stop debating about this issue, as I don't see it will come to and end anywhere. Still, you try to make fun of other people here. If we should discuss an issue like this, shouldn't I use statistics? In this case, saying what you think obviously isn't enough. So if I shouldn't point to statistics or say what I think, what should I do then? Find some celebrity quotes?

I could have added several lines in your cartoon, but I won't lower myself to that level.

so you have nothing to say about the swiss all having automatic weapons and the lowest amount of crime?

Or you still haven't got any suggestions on other reasons to the american rates?

I don't think firearms is the only factor. Factors like mental health care, amount of ethnic groups and cultures etc. probably are parts of the reason, but I think that the amount of guns (especially combined with other factors) have something to say.

In this debate I have said my opinion, and nothing is going to change that. Neither does it seems that you will change yours. But what you should do is to come with some explanations yourself instead of just criticize others.

your not listening.

Places where you can easily get guns have less crime then places where it is hard to get guns.

the reason being is people will not commit crimes against other people when the other people will shoot them.

its simple logic.

crime goes up in places where you can not get guns because people are not able to defend themselves against other people

if i walk in to a store with a hand gun, im going to be able to rob that store.

if i walk into a store with a hand gun, and the person behind the counter has a gun, and the guy grabbing a soda has a gun, and the girl reading the magazines also has a gun, there is a good chance im gonna get shot if i try and rob that store.

how hard is it to understand that.

Whatever the reason is, it's not that easy... Still, you haven't given any suggestions about the high rates in the US. I have asked 4-5 times...

i HAVE given you reasons.

Illegal weapons brought INTO the country by people from south america.
Gun laws that are TOO strict
BAD Parenting
POOR community awareness
GANG warfare

untill you can give statistics that show how many LEGAL guns are used in crimes/murders your argument is worth about nothing. You cant lump the united states as if it was one entitey, we are made up of differnt states with differnt laws, governed using the same bill of rights for everybody.

now tell me why the swiss have such a low crime rate, while maintaing giving every buddy automatic weapons.

I think Switzerland isn't as multicultural as America, and haven't got the same amounts of social problems. There are probably other factors as well, but I don't know that much about their politics...

Still, the focus is on Canada and Switzerland, which has high gun rates, but low murder rates. There are many other countries that have strict gun politics, but still much less crime than the US. Could you explain why it is like that?

Illegal weapons brought INTO the country by people from south america(highest amounts of firearm murders).
Gun laws that are TOO strict
BAD Parenting
POOR community awareness
GANG warfare

So other countries doesn't have any problems with those factors?

It would seem that most of the guns Owened by the swiss are kept after miltary service and are stored at home.

To be able to carry a gun (on the streets) you have to have a permit, which it would seem is hard to get..

" stating plausibly the need to carry firearms to protect oneself, other people, or real property from a specified danger "

" passing an examination proving both weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon "

Also the permit only last 5 years...

does that help?

Wiki

how many illegal weapons are used in the crime for the us.