Americans & Guns

[commonsense]

jackney sneeb for president!

A pervasive irrelevant concept pushed on society/schoolchildren by elitist self-serving totalitarians:

"The Founding Fathers were infallible, so therefore.......(add socialist lie here)"

Their philosophy isn't infallible. This is where education is necessary. Their truth is being systematically hidden and obscured ever since the socialist "Deweyites" the founders of "progressive" education.

I'm a student teacher and I have to restrain myself when all of academia tries to brainwash young future teachers by blaming the Bush administration (not that I'm a fan of them, although they are the lesser of evils) for the present condition of American education, which has been entirely the province of leftists since the thirties!!!

They are so transparently self serving (teachers) when they cry for more and more "funding" for computers, etc, when they should simply raise their standards and their proficiency and dedicate themselves to teahing basic skills instead of brainwashing leftist causes all day to our youth..

There really is a "dumbing-down" of America and funding won't change it.

Architecture and aqueducts built by the Romans are still standing today, their plans having been etched into the ground with a stick...and without the mathematical benefit of a concept of zero!!!

The most beautiful, abstract and hopeful ideas of man heve been shared with no more than a book, blackboard and sincere, dedicated teacher.

I want to be paid decently, but "education spending" is a lie for divisive socialist propaganda. I can give examples. I am surrounded by it here in college and it permeates everything. "Core Curriculum standards" ensure it. These are "interdisciplinary" requirements that amount to inserting propaganda into every subject, no matter how far a stretch!

You don't have to believe me, but trust me, its been so long an ideological part of our educatal system, that by now, the "lunatics" are truly in charge of the asylum and even they don't realize it.

[tman_ndsu08]

here is a message for anti-gun people...

...let anyone foolish enough come and try to take my gun away.

I will shoot you.

[Poetic_Justice]

I'm anti-gun, but simply because I wish guns will disappear doesn't mean I think it could ever happen (Unless a more 'effective' personal defense weapon were invented)

Being as it is that guns wil lnot disappear, I think good education on proper handling, care, and usage of guns is the best response to their existence, not regulating their ownership.

[SeanWah]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Poetic_Justice,)
I'm anti-gun, but simply because I wish guns will disappear doesn't mean I think it could ever happen (Unless a more 'effective' personal defense weapon were invented)

Being as it is that guns wil lnot disappear, I think good education on proper handling, care, and usage of guns is the best response to their existence, not regulating their ownership.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Why? Even a theoretical world where guns did not exist would be less preferable than a theoretical world where only good people owned guns.

In a world where no guns existed, criminals would need to rely only on their physical size.

[bugsbunny04]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (thrillofitall,)
my questions is what are people so worried about? If there were no guns, you wouldn't have to worry about the guy running around with a gun. and for the people who say it is self defence, that is why the police have guns. thats their job. it isnt your job to take the law into your own hands. lets the police/military protect you. i say make illegal all weapons except shotguns/rifles for those who use them for hunting. pistols and automatic/semi automatic rifles serve no point besides to hurt people.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Idiot. There was recently a supreme court ruling that excused police everywhere from having to worry about protecting your sorry ass. That is not why the police have guns. According to the supreme court, police have guns to protect police!

No purpose aside from to hurt people? And first of all, how would you distinguish guns designed to hurt people and those that can be used for hunting? Yeah, exactly, but beside the point. Ever heard of shooting sports? people test their reflexes, muscle control and all that good athletic stuff, they just have to be more careful, and it is one of the most demanding sports as far as skill requirements.

Ponder: Four people show up at your house with bats, pipes ect. breaking into your house. Assume you aint rich and can't afford to have a fortress house (and then youd be a prisoner in your own home...bad). Oh yeah, almost forgot, the nearest cop is an hour away, and they are breaking in RIGHT THE F*CK NOW! Do you pull out a gun and protect yourself or do you get your skull bashed in like a egg pitched at Mark Miguire?

Impossible? It happened to me, and since I'm alive to type this, you can probably guess that the choice I made is a helluva lot smarter than the one you would make.

[bugsbunny04]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (thrillofitall,)
i just dont understand why anyone would need to own a weapon, besides if they wanted to hurt someone. if nobody owned weapons, everyone would be safer.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

What do you want to ban after guns? Baseball/softball bats? Since I coach softball I think my union would shut your ass down out right. And if you did ban that, then whats next, steak knives? Construction materials? Rocks like the one kain used? Please.

The reason I own a weapon is so I can keep someone from hurting me or other would be victims. I have already analagetically and incidentally demonstrated that criminals will always have guns.

If I am ever teaching at a school that gets "columbined" (something that no amount of gun control can prevent, reference PA Luty's Expedient homemade firearms), I will probably get fired after the incident for having the gun that I shoot the son of a bitch with (saving an unknown number of lives of inicent would be victims) on campus and retroactively for having carried it on campus everyday, but I thats better than losing sleep over thinking about all the kids I could have saved but did'nt because my 357. Mag was at the house instead of in my (locked, only key mine) desk drawer when the shot started being fired.

[Jackney Sneeb]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (thrillofitall,)
my questions is what are people so worried about? If there were no guns, you wouldn't have to worry about the guy running around with a gun.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
For once I agree with a gun control nut. In fact, I openly advocate the British system where guns are outlawed and cops aren't allowed to carry them. If guns are bad and cause violence, then make them illegal. Start with the police as a perfect test group. Make it illegal to own guns and that goes for the police. After all, they're just ordinary human beings like the rest of us. If guns are the cause of violence, there will be an automatic decrease in gun injuries and deaths once hundreds of thousands of the most violent thugs in the country are disarmed.

I suspect a lot of law-abiding citizens will be disarmed, too, along with those liberals who currently advocate gun control for others, yet keep a weapon handy for their own protection. And millions of other people (including the few smart policemen, the ones who should be armed) will still have weapons for self defense against the few assholes who vicimize others in spite of the commandments of politicians.

Overall, it would make for a safer society. (The wasteful war on drugs would come to an abrupt end, too.)

--Jackney Sneeb

[tman_ndsu08]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
my questions is what are people so worried about? If there were no guns, you wouldn't have to worry about the guy running around with a gun.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Ever hear of the black market? You can simply buy a gun illegally.

[NORMLperson]

That is true,,,imagine if guns are outlawed or prohibited, then the black market would REALLY be dangerous. The facts still remain though. The 2nd ammendment is there for THE CHECKING OF TYRANNY! I also agree that if this is to be embraced by those who believe in the 2nd, then they should, as citizens of the US, voice their opinions on what and where they think our country should act or voice if they feel that our leaders are going to far in certain aspects (*ahem* Patriot Act). This CAN be done with out guns, if people can put aside differences, unite and organize, and move to get ahead somewhere. Still, the 2nd ammendment's inclusion of firearms can be seen as a failsafe for the people as a defense against unchecked government power. Education is extremely key in gun handling/control and also in general, in this country. I'll end there because I hate reading super long entries that can usually be condensed to a paragraph.

...uh no....but I can plead the 'fizif'!

[Edge]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)


Ever hear of the black market? You can simply buy a gun illegally.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
Dead Straight! It always pisses me off that those who want to pick up an ILLEGALLY imported and NOT LEGAL FOR SALE full auto AK-47 or M-16 could do so for less than half the cost of legal semi-automatic AR-15. It's been a few years since I checked, but the world market price for AK-47's was in the $180 range, AKM's (AK firing the 5.56nato) in the $330 range.

[Pooeypants]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (NORMLperson,)
That is true,,,imagine if guns are outlawed or prohibited, then the black market would REALLY be dangerous. The facts still remain though. The 2nd ammendment is there for THE CHECKING OF TYRANNY! I also agree that if this is to be embraced by those who believe in the 2nd, then they should, as citizens of the US, voice their opinions on what and where they think our country should act or voice if they feel that our leaders are going to far in certain aspects (*ahem* Patriot Act). This CAN be done with out guns, if people can put aside differences, unite and organize, and move to get ahead somewhere. Still, the 2nd ammendment's inclusion of firearms can be seen as a failsafe for the people as a defense against unchecked government power. Education is extremely key in gun handling/control and also in general, in this country. I'll end there because I hate reading super long entries that can usually be condensed to a paragraph.

...uh no....but I can plead the 'fizif'!<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
If the government really was ruling by tyranny and the common people wanted to revolt...I'm sure you'd need more than normal guns to take them down. Let's rally for ownership of RPGs, tanks, missiles etc...you'll need for that fight if it comes.

[Comrade]

that doesnt change the fact that guns in america kill more people than guns anywhere else. Why do you think America has this problem?
QUOTE]


Ever think about how large and populated America is compared to the vast majority of countries out there?
Who else? China? India? Both of which have Gestapo-esque government control?
Canada, which is bigger than America but has a fraction of the population?
Think, people.

Or blame it on MTV. I'm gangsta.

[Write Winger]

Interesting that people who don't think others should be armed do so often on the premise that they have a sense that they present a danger to themselves because they feel incompetant to own a gun. They are too clumsy, emotional or stupid to be trusted and project this low opinion of themselves onto others. I truly believe there really are people without the capability either physical or mental to have a gun and I agree they should make the decision not to have one.

I further think that there should be neighborhoods where such people must live and that fact should be advertised so that criminals will know which homes, cars, women, etc...to violate at will without fear of being shot by the homeowner. Less violence.

Then I can keep my guns against the day when such people become an electorial plurality and decide to take something of mine because they think they know better than I about what I need for self defense.

[Geoff332]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Ever think about how large and populated America is compared to the vast majority of countries out there?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
Well, the EU is geographically smaller than US (about half the land area) and larger in terms of population (about 100 million more people). This makes the population density of the EU something like four times the that of the US (in 2002, the EU had a population density of 303.4 people per square mile; the US 77.7). The EU has comparable (albeit not identical) judicial and legislative and executive systems. They are exposed to similar cultural influences.

In 1999, the US had a murder rate of 5.70 per 100,000 -- 3.72/100,000 were firearm related. Northern Ireland had a rate of 6.09 overall and 5.24 (in 1994 -- if you know your history, you will realise that this was time of virtual civil war in Northern Ireland). Finland had a rate of 3.2 over all and 0.86 for gun murders. The rest of the EU are less than 3 over all and 1.5 for gun murders. The average murder rate for the entire EU is 1.42 per 100,000; 0.53 for gun murders. What is perhaps most interesting is the rate of non-firearm related murders in the US (2.02) is greater than the total murder rate for the EU. To put that another way. There are 100 million more people in the EU than there are in the US, yet there are less than one third the total number of murders.

Everywhere in the world murder rates per capita generally increase as population denisity increases. Most EU nations have far higher population density than the US and far lower murder rates per capita. The fact that the US with significantly lower population density has such a high murder rate is something that cannot be explained by either simple demographics or the nature of the legislative or political system.

This is neither an argument for nor against gun control. The US has a higher non-gun murder rate than most EU contries total murder rates. The stats I have quoted are accurate -- largely drawn from official sources, such as the FBI crime reports and EU or UN sources.
</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Think, people.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>Good advice...

[commonsense]

Dear Geoff:
If your statistics are correct, and let's assume they are, I am interested in comparing the murder rates of the U.S. with those of Mexico and South America...
Realistically, the U.S. is geographically connected to those places and has effectively open borders, circumstances being especially conducive to the free-flow of dedicated criminals.
As far as the sociological comparison between the U.S. and Europe, I see plenty of evidence of a cultural gap far greater than what you suggest.
First of all, although my considerable personal sociological experience is largely anecdotal and admittedly a generalization, I view Europeans as a people who have developed a comparatively brief cyclical pattern of dealing with its historically high population density and culural heterogeneity:
frequent wars, revolutions and violent eruptions.
Europeans, and their pervasive American socialist counterparts are quick to point to their pseudo-intellectual conclusions that "europe has expansive centralized political, cultural and economic controls, along with strict gun control policies as the cause for its present (and very temporary) "pleasant" socio-economic conditions... along with the bureaucratically self-serving lie that human nature evolves, and that somehow the easily observable historical evidence to the contrary has somehow become a thing of the past within these scant two generations since WWII, the Spanish Civil War, the Hungarian Revolution... not to mention Kosovo, that Europe is now somehow transformed into some sort of eternally safe, clean and productive egalitarian paradise.
It isn't... and to the extent that many delude themselves into believing that is, it won't stay that way.
It would be interesting, and far more accurate, and far more indicative of the superiority of Freedom (such as it manages to currently exist in America) over the successive attempts at "forced egalitarianism" that have left gaping, bleeding wounds throughout both Europe's long-range and recent history.
Please do us sincere thinkers on this site a continued service and try factoring in all the deaths by war over any comparable span of time between Europe and the U.S and perhaps we'll see which of these philosophically vastly different systems better nurtures the positive side of the human spirit.
I just returned from an extensive anthropological study in Spain, and as intensely beautiful and culturally rich people they are, they must, as a kind of emotional survival skill, utterly delude themselves about what are the eternally unchanging realities of the best and worst in human nature, and what is the only sincere way to best cope with them... as they pontificate about their civility, blathering about artistic esoterica, blinding themselves about the seething European animosity, economic jealousy, class envy, nationalism and racism that surrounds them... as they sip their wine or expresso while tending the still-fresh graves of their parents....

[commonsense]

Just in case I failed in summarizing the typical European pseudo-intellectual position on political, economic and personal freedom, maybe this historical figure does it better:

"A very large measure of individual liberty is not necessarily the sign of a high degree of civilisation. On the contrary, it is the limitation of this liberty, within the framework of an organisation which incorporates men of the same race, which is the real pointer to the degree of civilasation attained." Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 423.

"In reality, the more primitive a people is, the more it resents as an intolerable restraint any limitation of the liberty of the individual." Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 424. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as Bormann-Vermerke.

[Edge]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Geoff332,)

In 1999, the US had a murder rate of 5.70 per 100,000 -- 3.72/100,000 were firearm related... The average murder rate for the entire EU is 1.42 per 100,000; 0.53 for gun murders.

This is neither an argument for nor against gun control.
Good advice...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

To try and normalize the data, I did a quick ratio or firearm murders : all murders. I found it interesting that despite the easy availability of guns, the ratio for the US was only .65, while the EU was .37. And while the US rate is 75% higher than the EU figure, I would have expected it to be much higher (in the 80-90% range) than that if the availability of firearms was so dominant in the cause of murder rates.

You are right. No agrument for or against. It may be fun to play number games, but comparing the costs of gun availability without weight of the benefits of the same gives you a number that is meaningless.

[commonsense]

Oh, by the way... while we're bashing the U.S. quality of life, its "savage" concept of individual liberty and property rights and its cowboy violence by comparing nations with lower gun injury/death rates, let's look at one country with DOUBLE our murder statistics:
RUSSIA, where nearly a century of brutal cenrtalized control, "egality" at the point of an armed government agent's gun while bureaucrats enjoy elitist privelege, and economic desperation as a result of self-serving bureaucratic control have created a moral climate more ruthless than anything any American WallStreet novel or old-time Western movie could ever hope to invent!!!!

Wake up to the economically ans spiritually destructive nature of the falsehood that is Socialism... even in its most seemingly benign form.

History proves it.

Freedom is the answer to every social problem the world suffers from today.

Read Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man".... at least the chapter on govrernments

Look at the broad historical proof that power can only corrupt

And may we return to the original concepts and philosophy of our Founding Fathers, the remnants of which we still owe as the cause for everything great that currently exists within the human experience... Freedom

[Pooeypants]

Oh the lack of freedom in UK is killing me...please let me join your glorious, the one and only righteous country :rolleyes:

[Automatic Nate]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
Oh the lack of freedom in UK is killing me...please let me join your glorious, the one and only righteous country :rolleyes:<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
ROFL