Gun control

Muurloen · Oct 28, 2013

i thought it was going to take off from the treadmill, but it didn't. i has a sad. :/

fanaskin · Oct 28, 2013

violent crime is generally higher in places with less guns wombat.

Frenzied Wombat · Oct 28, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
violent crime is generally higher in places with less guns wombat.

1) As I said, guns are only 50% of the equation and have a SYNERGISTIC effect when combined with a lack of social infrastructure. You can fill up the Vatican with AR-15's and I don't think it will impact the murder rate that much.
2) Are you seriously going to argue that guns reduce violent crime?
3) Ah yes, the skewed chart that makes it seem like Canada and Europe are more violent than the US. OK!

fanaskin · Oct 28, 2013

2.) Yes

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

Also in reference to england specifically

No matter how one approaches the figures, one is forced to
the rather startling conclusion that the use of firearms in
crime was very much less [in England before 1920] when
there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, con-
victed criminal or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm
without restriction

Eomer · Oct 28, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
violent crime is much higher i guess maybe not particularly killing

Violent crime worse in Britain than in US | Mail Online

I fucking hate you and fucking morons like you with such a depth of feeling it's almost impossible to describe. You realize that Daily Mail article is THE ONE THAT WAS BEING DEBUNKED IN THE LINK I PROVIDED PREVIOUSLY, RIGHT? No, you probably don't. Because you're a complete fucking imbecile.

"I guess maybe not particularly killing"? Seriously? I mean fucking seriously? The US has a homicide rate 3-4 times higher than the UK, and after claiming it was the opposite, your response is "maybe not particularly"?

I fucking hate you so very badly.

fanaskin · Oct 28, 2013

Frenzied Wombat · Oct 28, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
2.) Yes

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

Also in reference to england specifically

That study doesn't show that more guns= less crime, it shows exactly what I stated-- weak social policy combined with easy access to guns= more deaths. No shit Russia and Belarus have high murder rates despite having banned firearms. The place is massively corrupt and has almost as much of a "have and have nots" rift as the US does.

Also, if more guns= less violent crime, why not permit everybody to own hand grenades? If guns are a deterrent against crime, seems like upping the ante would follow in this trend.

P.S: I would feel infinitely more comfortable walking the streets of London at 3am vs any American city I've visited save maybe Portland and Burlington..

opiate82 · Oct 28, 2013

Even the Brady Center concedes that guns are used to prevent over 100,000* crimes a year in the US.
*Their number, others estimate it much higher, but this is another circumstance where the reporting and statistics are poor

There is a reason guns are called the great equalizer. As far as why not allow hand grenades, you are assuming there is a linear correlation between strength of weapons available to their ability to prevent crimes. I would argue it probably looks much more like a bell curve.

*edit: Of course, then you start getting into the argument of weighting crimes. How many rapes = 1 murder? etc.

fanaskin · Oct 28, 2013

Frenzied Wombat_sl said:
That study doesn't show that more guns= less crime, it shows exactly what I stated-- weak social policy combined with easy access to guns= more deaths.

yeah not really no

Eomer · Oct 28, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
.

Violent crime is higher in england deal with it

Except it actually isn't, you fucking imbecile.

Frenzied Wombat · Oct 28, 2013

opiate82_sl said:
Even the Brady Center concedes that guns are used to prevent over 100,000* crimes a year in the US.
*Their number, others estimate it much higher, but this is another circumstance where the reporting and statistics are poor

There is a reason guns are called the great equalizer. As far as why not allow hand grenades, you are assuming there is a linear correlation between strength of weapons available to their ability to prevent crimes. I would argue it probably looks much more like a bell curve.

Well, according to the study Fanaskin quoted "National institute of justice surveys among prison inmates find that the large percentages report that their fear that a victim might be armed deterred them from confrontation crimes"

So logic would then dictate that if a robber is deterred by the possibility that the resident is also armed with a handgun, they would be even moreso deterred if that homeowner had a tripod mounted M60 on their balcony. Well, at least if I was a robber I would be.. So I'm a law abiding citizen and firearms reduce crime, so why not just give people even bigger deterrents? It may not be linear as you stated, but if guns= less crime, and bigger guns= even less crime (even if incremental), then why not?

Eomer · Oct 28, 2013

Bro, you're distracting from the central issue here: fanaskin thought that the UK had a murder rate double that of the US, and when it was pointed out that the US in fact has a homicide rate quadruple that of the UK, his response was "i guess maybe not particularly killing." It boggles the mind.

Frenzied Wombat · Oct 28, 2013

Eomer_sl said:
Bro, you're distracting from the central issue here: fanaskin thought that the UK had a murder rate double that of the US, and when it was pointed out that the US in fact has a homicide rate quadruple that of the UK, his response was "i guess maybe not particularly killing." It boggles the mind.

There wasn't even any subjectivity to his argument-- it was just plain and factually wrong. Even facts aside, you spend one week in England and the reality pretty much paints itself.. Plus he forgot to try and blame all violent crime on the Zionists..

Muurloen · Oct 28, 2013

Frenzied Wombat_sl said:
Well, according to the study Fanaskin quoted "National institute of justice surveys among prison inmates find that the large percentages report that their fear that a victim might be armed deterred them from confrontation crimes"

So logic would then dictate that if a robber is deterred by the possibility that the resident is also armed with a handgun, they would be even moreso deterred if that homeowner had a tripod mounted M60 on their balcony. Well, at least if I was a robber I would be.. So I'm a law abiding citizen and firearms reduce crime, so why not just give people even bigger deterrents? It may not be linear as you stated, but if guns= less crime, and bigger guns= even less crime (even if incremental), then why not?

Bro, you can own a pre-ban M60 or an MG-42 if you want. It is called a Class 3 License. Just be prepared to pay over $6000 for a piece of shit MAC-10 at the entry level of class 3 weapons.

Frenzied Wombat · Oct 28, 2013

Muurloen_sl said:
Bro, you can own a pre-ban M60 or an MG-42 if you want. It is called a Class 3 License. Just be prepared to pay over $6000 for a piece of shit MAC-10 at the entry level of class 3 weapons.

Interesting to know.. So out of curiosity, assuming the price was more reasonable, do you think allowing the mass proliferation of these types of weapons using the same guidelines and restrictions for current firearms would have a net positive or negative effect on violent crime statistics?

Muurloen · Oct 28, 2013

It will make no difference one way or another because they are so rare to begin with. And if those that are out there are used for crime, then the market availability for them will lessen and lessen.

Muurloen · Oct 28, 2013

Backing up the the Class 3 license for a sec. IIIC, in Texas along with getting the ATF to sign off on your application, which includes a whole gambit of stuff from finger prints, proving that you can keep your weapon safely stored and among other things, paying like $500 for a tax stamp, you have to also get your Chief Law Enforcement Officer to sign off on the weapon to allow it in their city or county. GL with that.

Hoss · Oct 28, 2013

opiate82_sl said:
How many rapes = 1 murder? etc.

That answer depends on whether you were the one who got raped.

Agraza · Oct 28, 2013

Muurloen_sl said:
Backing up the the Class 3 license for a sec. IIIC, in Texas along with getting the ATF to sign off on your application, which includes a whole gambit of stuff from finger prints, proving that you can keep your weapon safely stored and among other things, paying like $500 for a tax stamp, you have to also get your Chief Law Enforcement Officer to sign off on the weapon to allow it in their city or county. GL with that.

We should scrap all that bureaucracy and just ban guns. Smaller, more efficient government awaits.

Hoss · Oct 28, 2013

Frenzied Wombat_sl said:
That study doesn't show that more guns= less crime, it shows exactly what I stated-- weak social policy combined with easy access to guns= more deaths. No shit Russia and Belarus have high murder rates despite having banned firearms. The place is massively corrupt and has almost as much of a "have and have nots" rift as the US does.

Funny how those corrupt places with such large gaps between classes seem to have the worst gun laws.

Gun control

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Well known agitator

Potato del Grande

Well known agitator

Trakanon Raider

Well known agitator

Potato del Grande

Bronze Squire

Well known agitator

Trakanon Raider

Potato del Grande

Trakanon Raider

Potato del Grande

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Potato del Grande

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Make America's Team Great Again

Registered Hutt

Make America's Team Great Again