|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 10, 2018, 11:59 AM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
|
|
February 10, 2018, 12:12 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
Thanks for the link Pax. I will have to spend a little time examining his data, but it does support my position that it is not guns that are the problem here or abroad.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
February 10, 2018, 12:42 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
Quote:
Zukiphile's big Greek friend's statement does show that in an armed society impolite behavior that crosses the line may have serious consequences. The old adage that Colt made all men equal comes to mind.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
|
February 10, 2018, 03:15 PM | #54 |
Junior Member
Join Date: February 6, 2018
Posts: 7
|
"You shouldn't try and prove why guns are good"
Tools aren't bad or good, just tools. But since I feel that there is a very big movement against guns in general, and at least I have had much difficulty in finding pro arguments I wanted some help. It can be beneficial when discussing with other people sometimes. I can always say "I think so" and argue well, but if there actually existed some objective (little naive me... chuckles...) studies that shows some heavy arguments pro guns, it could help. But since most of you don't live in Europe, I guess you don't meet people that look at you (a person that likes to shoot with guns competitively) like a gun freak. And the attitude would be totally horrendous if the discussion went towards letting people have guns like allowed from your 2nd amendment. ;-) It's actually on the level that many people would like to contact the authorities to get your children from you (not kidding). Let it sink in... |
February 10, 2018, 03:32 PM | #55 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,454
|
Quote:
But then the wheels began turning. "So if I bump into someone accidentally he will just shoot me?" It doesn't really work that way because no one wants to go to prison for that, and your rethinking your aggressiveness translates to others who also don't want to solve a trivial problem with a gun. He was a smart lad then, and he is still a good friend, but at 19 he had the worldview of a soccer hooligan. That there are plenty of polite but unarmed americans misses the point of the aphorism that an armed society is a polite society. The ethic that one should measure his actions so as to not deserve harm depends on harm to a perpetrator being a real possibility. That ethic is missing in a soccer riot.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
February 10, 2018, 03:39 PM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
|
|
February 10, 2018, 03:57 PM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
Quote:
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
|
February 10, 2018, 04:32 PM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Last edited by manta49; February 10, 2018 at 04:46 PM. |
|
February 10, 2018, 08:24 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,454
|
Quote:
You assert that the possibility of harm to a perpetrator "doesn't come into it", yet if people act rationally, they will assess the risk of an act. Why would people who rape, rob or assault be different? Rape, robbery and assault rates appear to be about double in the UK as compared to the US. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-...obbery-victims These are both relatively prosperous places with a common legal tradition. One notable difference is in the rates of arms ownership. That doesn't make the US problem free. We have some terribly dangerous cities. Chicago murder rates are a matter of frequent news comment. Chicago also has demonstrated somethng less than good faith in allowing people to carry arms legally. I wonder whether you think citation to the sorts of crime that happen face to face and involve use of force is a a slight to the English, Irish and Scottish. It isn't. The same point was made in the Champpenal report about canadian populations. Many citizens of the US can pass for canadians and vice versa. The point is to isolate the variable of possession and legally protected use inso far as that is possible.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
February 15, 2018, 10:54 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 6,126
|
I have yet to see any evidence that guns in the hands of private citizens has a positive effect on violent crime over all.
The arguments for general gun ownership tend to be about individual action rather than social benefits. |
February 16, 2018, 01:45 AM | #61 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,833
|
Quote:
The more I think on it, the more I realized that I don't really care much anymore about crime "overall", I care about crime on the personal level, in other words, what could happen to me, and mine. And on that level I ABSOLUTELY believe in the positive effect on crime of a gun in the hands of a private citizen (me!),
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
February 16, 2018, 04:08 AM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,647
|
I seem to recall some time ago a gulf state LA I think was having a big problem with car jacking. They passed a law that basically said to was OK to shoot carjackers. Carjackings dropped to almost 0. In FL when they decided to recognize out of state CCW the problem of tourist getting carjacked or robbed dropped. You could tell the tourist by the rental car sticker on the car or the out of state plates. Both of these things happened so long ago I don't recall the numbers.
ADD: As old Sam Clemens said, " There are three kinds of lies. lies, damn lies and statistics." I don't put much faith in statistics especially when all you can get it the executive summary and they will not publish how they got there.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81 |
February 16, 2018, 04:09 AM | #63 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,299
|
Quote:
"If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?" |
|
February 16, 2018, 07:08 AM | #64 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
Quote:
This thread isn't focused on the US, but our Bill of Rights is all about protecting the individual. My daughter was horrified the first time I told her that it was the most undemocratic document ever drafted.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
February 16, 2018, 11:22 AM | #65 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,454
|
Quote:
It seems reasonable to exercise foresight about an act without regard to the motive for undertaking the act. The bolded part is your act. How might your act change the behavior of others? If you carry an arm concealed, and the other 19 people in a society of 20 don't, the benefit to you is direct, but some benefit may also accrue to the other 19. Someone seeking to use force against me may factor in the risk, a 5% chance of confronting someone armed, and amend his behavior. I'm a free rider in this scenario. If the three of us are all part of a group of 20 who are prohibited from having arms, someone seeking to use force against me can factor in his own relative safety. There is no reason to believe this person so thoroughly irrational that he would disregard his own safety.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; February 16, 2018 at 11:32 AM. |
||
February 16, 2018, 11:25 AM | #66 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
^^^ Fair enough.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
February 16, 2018, 05:20 PM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,498
|
There is a lot of factors that get pulled into this type of a discussion. My opinion is that one factor rarely discussed holds more answers than everyone realizes. Apologies if its already been mentioned. I scanned thru the thread and did not see any similar ideas, but I also didnt read word for word.
Here goes: Todays violent criminals are either more prevalent, or more prone to commit the violence. 25, 30 years ago, the experts advice to anyone victimized by these violent criminals was "Comply, give them what they want, do not resist or fight back." And that advice likely was best, and victims probably did have a higher survival rate if they complied. But, WHY was compliance back then able to avert violence? My hypothesis is that those criminals feared the repercussions of getting caught, and sent to jail. It has only taken a few decades of relaxing crime laws, fumbled investigations and lazy prosecutors, etc, etc for the criminal mentality to adapt. Realizing that the risk of getting caught and locked up for their crimes is low enough in this day and age to justify using violence even when their victims are complying. I couldn't say what todays experts advice is, but I do not believe in absolute compliance with an armed criminal. If one can fight or resist, I think one should. Resistance would be much more complicated and difficult if our society was entirely anti-gun.
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard |
February 16, 2018, 08:46 PM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
Quote:
We continue to see a general outcry for something to be done to stop the senseless violence. That something is almost always a cry for more gun control laws. What we need is for politicians and government to have the guts and will to enforce the laws already in place, and to honestly address the underlying issues.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
|
February 16, 2018, 09:16 PM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 20, 2014
Location: Kinda near Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,254
|
Quote:
|
|
February 16, 2018, 10:43 PM | #70 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2002
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 377
|
Quote:
__________________
"Personal weapons are what raised mankind out of the mud, and the rifle is the queen of personal weapons. The possession of a good rifle, as well as the skill to use it well, truly makes a man the monarch of all he surveys." -Jeff Cooper, The Art of the Rifle- |
|
February 16, 2018, 11:34 PM | #71 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2002
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 377
|
Quote:
"...the most undemocratic document ever drafted...". What a great description of individual rights codified.
__________________
"Personal weapons are what raised mankind out of the mud, and the rifle is the queen of personal weapons. The possession of a good rifle, as well as the skill to use it well, truly makes a man the monarch of all he surveys." -Jeff Cooper, The Art of the Rifle- |
|
February 17, 2018, 01:30 AM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 6,126
|
44 AMP, The Kennesaw experiment isn't quite the clear cut victory its proponents claim.
https://www.snopes.com/kennesaw-gun-law/ Mandatory gun ownership in Kennesaw was a knee jerk reaction to anti-gun laws in Morton Grove Ill. The laws were not enforce so that not one person was required in fact to own a firearm. Crime was already very low in Kennesaw, it had zero murders the year before the law was enacted and four armed robberies. Burglaries did decrease from 55 in in 1981 to 27 in 1982 and then 11 by 1985. But crime across the state of Georgia was dropping at a similar rate. So correlation is not causation, but there is a stronger correlation between criminal trends in Kennesaw and those state wide than there is with Kennesaw's gun law. Another place that mirrored Kennesaw's drop in crime rates was Morton Grove, Ill. Morton Grove's gun law stayed in place till 2008 till it was repealed due to the cost of litigation. Here's crime data from before the law was repealed and after. There is no statistically meaningful change. http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime...-Illinois.html |
February 17, 2018, 01:41 AM | #73 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 6,126
|
zukiphile: Herd immunity perhaps? The closer the carry rate gets to 100% the less likely that anyone gets robbed.
It sounds good but lets say instead of a gun you are carrying a lump of metal that has several hundred dollars in value and is easily converted into cash. What is the risk reward for the scenario? If criminals are rational actors when it comes to avoiding armed confrontations, would they not also be equally rational when it comes to getting a greater reward? would they be more likely to avoid or develop tactics to lessen the risk of getting that valuable lump of metal? |
February 17, 2018, 04:50 AM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,299
|
K_Mac, which ones of these qualify as non-violent to you?
https://corrections.az.gov/sites/def...8/cagjan18.pdf Really not trying to be snarky, but I'm in the mix here, and honestly a number of SMI inmates are quite violent. The state currently classifies about 1/4 of the population as non-violent. I would hazard a guess that the citizens of my state might not be amused if we decided to let them all out the front door. Interestingly enough, we list more than 1/4 as requiring on going mental health treatment, and we do provide it 24/7, in some places. You ask us to enforce the laws - we do, and this requires prisons. I would love to see a return to quality state mental institutions, with GOOD oversight this time to avoid the issues of the 60s and 70s that caused them to turn loose patients on the streets, sometimes turning to crime to live, but that would require some work on federal and state level. This would help - removing the criminal alien population would cut almost 10% of our population right off the top. Build the wall. BTW, have you been in a prison? If not, I would ask you look into taking a tour of a facility near you. Note, I am not disagreeing with you completely, but saying the solution to overcrowding is not as easy as it sounds. Interestingly enough, we aren't overcrowded, under capacity, and we released more inmates than we took in last month. Just sayin'. |
February 17, 2018, 11:41 AM | #75 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
|
Armoredman I have never been an inmate, but I have been in both state and federal facilities a number of times and have a couple of friends who have been correctional officers and medical staff for many years.
I am not suggesting turning loose all nonviolent prisoners. I am suggesting that we are locking up the wrong ones many times. We lock up drug offenders and abused and troubled youths and release violent cons. If your facility is not overcrowded you are very lucky compared to anything in my part of the world. As I said this will require government to address the underlying problems. I'm not attacking you and the men and women who put their lives on the line daily to serve in prisons. That does not mean that what we are doing is working though. The care given and conditions in the state and federal institutions all over our country should be an embarrassment to all thinking people. They are not correctional facilities, but holding pens. There are many who think that is good enough, but it creates a police state that is dangerous for all of us, especially the poor and marginalized. Taking our guns and locking up ever larger numbers of citizens is not going to stop the prevailing violence.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin |
|
|