One life taken by cars is one life too many. I don't understand how people can continue to defend the use of cars after so many tragedies. Haven't you learned anything? Cars kill. Yes I know, it's not cars but the people who own them but if you make the car laws stricter so that only certain people can own them, you won't have any Tom, Dick or Harry just going to the grocery store and buying themselves a car to kill someone with.
There are nearly 200 million cars and light trucks (which includes SUVs and pick-up trucks) registered in the U.S. In 1998 (the latest year I could find complete data for) there were 14,471 traffic fatalities. Of these, 2,549 were children.
Let's now look at firearms:
Annually, there are around 1,400 firearms-related deaths in America. (I could not find statistics for individual years, nor separate figures for children).
Now, if the death of one child is one too many, why isn't the death of 2,549 children (nearly twice the annual gun death total) raising as big a hue and cry as gun deaths?
Think about why you perceive guns to be more dangerous than automobiles. "Guns are for killing!"
Well, of course. That's why you can't buy one at the corner grocery (unless your corner grocer has a valid license to sell firearms). Your corner gun dealer can't (and won't) sell firearms to anyone under the age of eighteen, nor will he sell handguns to anyone younger than twenty-one.
I am a firearms owner and know just how difficult it is for a qualified buyer to purchase handguns. I am also familiar with firearms safety (I keep mine locked up when not in use) and do not let my son play with guns or gun-like toys. I fully intend to indoctrinate him thoroughly in the principles of firearms safety long before he will be allowed to even touch one.
If you don't like guns, don't buy any. Don't ever call the police for help, either. They carry guns on a regular basis, here in the U.S.
As far as guns preventing crime, let me say this: it isn't armed citizens shooting at badguys that is responsible for the reduction of crime and murder rates in areas where gun possession is fairly liberal. It's the knowledge that a potential victim may be armed that prompts criminals to choose less-violent crimes. There's less likelihood your victim can justifiably shoot at you that way.
Here's a link related to this topic:
Please read it (without prejudice) before commenting. (First of Two, if you could assist with more information or links, I'd appreciate it.)
The Constitution does not tell us what rights we may have, but defines just how far the government is allowed to go in the performance of its duties. Free Speech, Freedom of Religion, and the Right to Bear Arms are, as defined by the Constitution, "God-given rights", and exhisted prior to its being set down on paper.
Almost everywhere else in the world, the right to exercise deadly force, and the implements with which to deal it, have been reserved only for the priveledged class. In the U.S., it isn't. Firearms ownership by law-abiding citizens is not the greatest danger to face the western world, nor is it likely to be. I agree that it's criminal to shoot someone without cause, but that is already illegal.
If you outlaw guns, you define law abiding citizens as criminal. You still haven't arrested, disarmed, or put away the crack dealer or the rapist or the burglar who you fear. Instead, you have just made it safer for them to ply their trade. You have also just increased the workload for the police, who will now have even less time to go after the violent criminals.
--Baloo
------------------
A cheeseburger, french fries and a vanilla shake. It's not the best meal; far from it. But it is perfect, the Holy Trinity of American cuisine.
--James Lileks
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 11, 1999).]
), but I was about to make this point myself. Cars kill far more people than guns ever have (in civilian life, of course).------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
------------------
- Alshrim Dax
The Other Dax
Of course, if people in the US drove better too. Anyone got a comparison for different countries? I was sure that the UK consisted of mainly safe drivers. Out of all of Europe, we're the country second least-likely to go through amber lights. Woo, what an exciting bunch we are, eh?
------------------
"Obesity. Adiposity. Corpulence. Whatever word you use, it represents one thing: being a big fatass."
Geraldo Rivera
Here's the data for 1996 (again, the latest year for which I could find data): 6,842,000 total, with a crash rate of 276 crashes per 100 million miles (or 27.6 per billion). 37,351 of those were fatal, for a fatality rate of 1.5 per 100 billion miles.
Let's see if we can find the data for Canada, U.K., Australia, Germany, etc., and compare (after converting statistics to a mutually intelligible statistic, like "crashes/fatalities per million kilometers, or some such).
I'm curious, but it took a @#$% long time to find the stats I did. It looks like the agencies with the numbers are so proud of their sites, they want you to wander around in a dazed wonder, admiring their handiwork. Of course, it doesn't help that U.S. Government sites tend to use "Bureaucratese", so nothing you want is called by a name you recognize. The above information was listed as "Crashes and Crash Rates by Month and Severity". Almost obvious, once you wade past the 5 or so peripherally-related pages to get there.
--Baloo
------------------
A cheeseburger, french fries and a vanilla shake. It's not the best meal; far from it. But it is perfect, the Holy Trinity of American cuisine.
--James Lileks
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 11, 1999).]
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
------------------
"Obesity. Adiposity. Corpulence. Whatever word you use, it represents one thing: being a big fatass."
Geraldo Rivera
As Benjamin Disraeli once said:
"There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
--Baloo
(Hmmm... I had thought that was a Mark Twain quote, but I checked my facts prior to posting. Sometimes what you know is wrong.)
------------------
"You got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there."
--Yogi Berra
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
------------------
Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!!
Gandalf
------------------
"Obesity. Adiposity. Corpulence. Whatever word you use, it represents one thing: being a big fatass."
Geraldo Rivera
------------------
With 17 hours of class, guess what I'm doing.
How many of these firearms deaths are by accident? Zip. none. nadda. Goose egg. Almost every single firearm death in the USA was Intentional. The guys who carry these guns and shoot up innocent people did it deliberately. All those school shootings, the Montreal Massacre, even the recent shooting in the Netherlands. Every one of those people had an intention to kill. How often do you get that in a car?
Also, cars are an important element in society these days. So where do the guns fall in?
------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation
------------------
"I wish that everything went just as I wish everything would go."
--
John Linnell
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
90% of shootings that take place in the city is one criminal shooting another criminal.
80-85% of "acquaintance homicides" (that is, where the vicim knew the killer), the most common type, are committed by people who know each other because they are members of rival gangs or they buy and sell drugs to each other (or are competing dealers) -- Kleck, "Targeting Guns: Firearms and Violence in America" 1997.
Take Minneapolis. A fair city, as cities go, low gang membership, etc. However, 45% of murders in Minneapolis from 1994-1997 were classified by the police as "gang-related." 45.4% of those arrested for all those murders were gang members. On average, the 234 Minneapolis murderers had 7.4 prior arrests, including 175 drug offenses, 173 violent crimes, 169 property crimes, and 82 prior weapons offenses.
31.4% were on felony probation.
(Kleck, ibid.)
seems to me it isn't the guns that are the problem.
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
But seriously, if you did a background check for previous criminal record before selling someone a gun, and refuse to sell them one if they're on parol or previously commited a violent crime and was released from prison within, say, the last five years, it seems like that would eliminate a very high percentage of gun-related crime.
Maybe that should be part of sentencing for convicts of violent crimes. "This court sentences you to ten years in prison, with possibility of parol after five years. This court also rules that you will not be allowed to purchace a firearm for five years after your release." It makes more sense for a judge to, well, judge each situation, rather than use broad legal generalizations. Just say that the judges CAN, not that they have to.
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
------------------
Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!!
Gandalf
[This message has been edited by Kosh (edited December 13, 1999).]
Trying to buy a gun is a violation of parole terms, and the person who violates parole this way must return to jail to serve the remaining portion of his sentence. Why is this not happening?
I agree that simply passing laws is an inneffective means of dealing with the problem of violent crime. The laws which already exist should be sufficient, if they are enforced. Passing new laws without enforcing them is as effective as saying "isn't that a shame?" whenever a crime is committed.
If the objective is not eliminating violent crime, but simply eliminating guns, then perhaps the tactic of not enforcing existing laws makes sense. If you can continue to convince enough people that "since the new law doesn't work" you can sell the need to pass another, more draconian law. Eventually, unless enough people catch on, you can pass the law you wanted to pass in the first place, disarming all the people who weren't making trouble anyway.
Outlawing firearms does not remove a single weapon from the hands of a single criminal, unless you count all the people who were formerly law-abiding citizens who are now, by definition, criminals, due to the fact that their formerly-legal possessions are now contraband, making them criminals by default. Disarming people who are not violating the law will have no positive effect on the crime rate.
--Baloo
------------------
"You got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there."
--Yogi Berra
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 13, 1999).]
------------------
Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!!
Gandalf
------------------
"I wish that everything went just as I wish everything would go."
--
John Linnell
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
You have very low opinions on Liberals, don't you? It seems apparent that Conservatives attack Liberals for every small mistake.
Liberals do NOT do what you say. Contrary to what you think, Gun Control is enforced up here in Canada. How well? well, admittedly, I don't know, but don't hold me to that. The reason why gun control is doing so badly down in the USA is that your conservatives actually sabotage each and every single gun control law that your government to make society a better place.
I just heard that Los Angeles has run a gun-show convention out of town. Good for them.
Baloo:
If the objective is not eliminating violent crime, but simply eliminating guns, then perhaps the tactic of not enforcing existing laws makes sense. If you can continue to convince enough people that "since the new law doesn't work" you can sell the need to pass another, more draconian law. Eventually, unless enough people catch on, you can pass the law you wanted to pass in the first place, disarming all the people who weren't making trouble anyway.
I'd have to agree with this point, although I don't support it. Sure, people wants to own guns, fine. Just abide by the rules. Abide by the Gun-Control rules which won't hurt you, but make your home a better place to live. I'll give you credit for the fact that you are very conscious about keeping your guns away from your son until he is old enough.
But how old will he be when you plan to train him about proper gun usage? 12? 13? Here in Ontario, the Conservatives passed a law allowing kids as young as 12 to start firearms training. Their intention is to train people about proper firearms usage. But this may backfire: pretty soon, you may have a troubled youth with advanced firearms knowledge (thanks to the new law), walking through with guns under their trenchcoats and causing yet another Columbine.
You want proper firearms usage? Simple. Don't use them. Unless you're a dedicated police officer.
First of Two:
Take Minneapolis. A fair city, as cities go, low gang membership, etc. However, 45% of murders in Minneapolis from 1994-1997 were classified by the police as "gang-related." 45.4% of those arrested for all those murders were gang members. On average, the 234 Minneapolis murderers had 7.4 prior arrests, including 175 drug offenses, 173 violent crimes, 169 property crimes, and 82 prior weapons offenses.
31.4% were on felony probation.
(Kleck, ibid.)
seems to me it isn't the guns that are the problem.
Pardon me while a shoot a big hole in your statistic, but yes, guns ARE the problem, especially how accessible they are to these gang members who shoot each other and any innocent bystanders that get in the way. Proper enforcement of Gun Control is supposed to deal with this, to make it a lot harder for them to obtain these weapons (and more punishing when they do). Too bad for you guys though, those damned Republicans just drilled your most recent attempt to make your place a safer place to live.
To my knowledge, the gun control law is supposed to ban lethal weapons like machine guns, certain handguns and the like. For all other weapons, they are to be registered and a background check done on the owner. Let's compare this to getting a car: Like guns, you need to register your cars as well. And like guns, a background check has to be done to see if you are legally able to drive a car.
Like our Prime Minister said quite a while ago: "We make people register their cars, why not make them register their guns?"
Where's the trouble in that?
------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation
[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited December 14, 1999).]
"Once you have them in your home, anything you do is nice and legal."
"Really? Oh Flanders..."
"It doesn't work if you invite them in."
------------------
"I wish that everything went just as I wish everything would go."
--
John Linnell
------------------
"I suppose you thought I was dead? No such thing. Don't flatter yourselves that I haven't got my eye upon you. I am wide awake, and you give plenty to look at."
Household Words, Aug. 24, 1850
From the Raven in the Happy Family
As to the kids in Colorado, they made a video tape before going on their shooting spree, a guy from a gun store had called the house to tell one of the fathers that his clips had arrived. The boy said that if his father had checked into the call, they would have been caught before the shooting. Those two should never have been aloud to buy clips, or any other parts of a gun. They made this tape in the basement of one of there homes, outlineing what they were going to do, and gave hate as the reason. They hated everyone and everything. So much rage for ones so young.
(Thanks 1stof2, I keep thinking of Cloumbine as Texas for some reason)
------------------
Fool of a Took, throw yourself in next time!!
Gandalf
[This message has been edited by Kosh (edited December 14, 1999).]
[This message has been edited by Kosh (edited December 15, 1999).]
>"Pardon me while a shoot a big hole in your statistic, but yes, guns ARE the problem, especially how accessible they are to these gang members who shoot each other and any innocent bystanders that get in the way. Proper enforcement of Gun Control is supposed to deal with this, to make it a lot harder for them to obtain these weapons (and more punishing when they do). Too bad for you guys though, those damned Republicans just drilled your most recent attempt to make your place a safer place to live."
HAHAHA! You actually BELIEVE this? No wonder we aren't making any progress! Kid, those gang members ALREADY obtain guns illegally! in fact, it's usually the ONLY way they get guns! So tell me, how is another law going to change that? It CAN'T. And it's NOT the Republicans who are failing to enforce the laws... much as I hate to agree with Omega, it's the generally liberalized justice system that's doing that!
Richmond, VA is enforcing its "use a gun in a crime, automatic 5 years tacked on in the federal pen, with no parole" laws now for the first time... and drawing some left-wing fire for doing so. (Oh, and you can't "poke a hole" in a statistic without quoting a more relevant statistic... like how many gang members came by their guns using currently legal means...although you probably wouldn't want to do that, as it would likely support MY case more than yours.)
Baloo: You hit the nail on the head, sir. Pass a lot of laws, conveniently ignore enforcing them, then ride the public outcry over the next tragedy to even stricter measures, hopefully to an outright ban. THAT one, of course, you enforce.
No, the guns aren't the problem. Guns are neutral objects, neither good nor evil. (In actuality, guns are used thousands of times more for a "good" end -- in law enforcement, preventing crimes by their mere display, etc. -- than for "evil" ones. This statement is unassailable, and the UCR bears it out.)
Scum, and our failure to deal with scum properly, is the problem. Our reluctance to see that that is the actual problem is the secondary problem. We continue to insist that all these people with 7 arrests to their record need is a "second chance" -- which, 80% of the time, turns into a third, fourth, fifth, etc chance. And this doesn't just apply to gun homicides. Can you guess the percentage of DUI vehicular homicides perpetrated by people with a long history of DUI behaviour or other arrests?
a)90% b)80% c)75% d)85%
Final answer?
Oh, and about the rules for gun safety... 12 is a very late start to teach them. _I_ knew enough to stay out of my father's den (where the guns are kept) at FOUR, even though I didn't really know why. I was, as I recall, seven when my father let me fire a pistol, after showing me just what could happen (with props like a watermelon and a gallon jug full of water) if I misused it. I learned the Three Laws immediately thereafter, and though I still live with guns, use them, and probably will forever, I have never had either the desire to use them on a human being, NOR any form of accident. Nor will I, unless it become necessary to protect myself or my close ones from an intruder who some 'feel-good' allowed out on the street on 'parole.'
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
[This message has been edited by First of Two (edited December 14, 1999).]
Tahna:
I'm talking US liberals. Liberalism and conservatism are relative terms depending on what system you're under. What we call a liberal here would probably be a moderate up there, what with your socialized medicine and all. Hey, would you mind if we sent you some of our liberals? They'd love it up there, and average intelligence in both countries would go up! (Just kidding, of course. I love Canada, thanks to one too many eps of "Due South".)
"You have very low opinions on Liberals, don't you? It seems apparent that Conservatives attack Liberals for every small mistake."
Yep, I do have a low opinion of US liberal philosophies. Most liberals here don't think about what they're asked to believe, they just believe it. Like my grandfather. He'd vote for Satan if he was on the Democratic ticket. Those that do actually think about their beliefs are almost invariably socialists more interested in their own power than the well-being of the country. I have no tolerance for either unthinking people or uncaring, selfish people.
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
Omega: "Unthinking people or uncaring, selfish people" are exactly what liberals call conservatives and vice versa, as I've stated in another thread. Thanks for using the phrase, anyway.
[We now return you to our regularly-scheduled thread.]
------------------
"You got to be very careful if you don't know where you're going, because you might not get there."
--Yogi Berra
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
There's also a third, relatively small group I didn't mention: those who acctually do think about liberal policies, know they're socialist, and think that socialism IS best for the country. The problem here is that they must either not know or choose to ignore all of history, because every single time socialism has been tried, from Plymouth to USSR, it failed. These I can deal with, because since they actually think, they can be reasoned with, and thus shown that socialism has never, and will never, work.
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
Now, how many of the people killed by guns was deliberate?
No-one drives their car through a school in a killing spree. Guns however are a different story with people just going wild. This is why gun control is needed.
And anyway, I think that use of my quote from that other thread is just a desperate attempt to justify the use of guns in the midst of such anti-firearm publicity.
BTW: I have just seen Tahna's post on the first page and he is saying exactly what I said. I must read the whole thread before posting the next time.
------------------
The line must be drawn here, this far, no further. Picard, First Contact
The line has to be drawn here, this far and no further. Quark, Dogs of War
[This message has been edited by Orion Syndicate (edited December 15, 1999).]
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
Socialism works to a certain extent. Countries like the Netherlands have implemented some things the U.S. would consider socialist, but that doesn't mean simple little things will fail, either.
------------------
Elim Garak: "Oh, it's just Garak. Plain, simple Garak. Now, good day to you, Doctor. I'm so glad to have made such an... interesting new friend today." (DS9: "Past Prologue")
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
------------------
Elim Garak: "Oh, it's just Garak. Plain, simple Garak. Now, good day to you, Doctor. I'm so glad to have made such an... interesting new friend today." (DS9: "Past Prologue")
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
------------------
Elim Garak: "Oh, it's just Garak. Plain, simple Garak. Now, good day to you, Doctor. I'm so glad to have made such an... interesting new friend today." (DS9: "Past Prologue")
--Baloo
------------------
The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out, the conservative adopts them.
--Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[Post-edit commentary: It continually amazes me how I can mis-spell words I know by heart, by typing a wrong letter that does not even have the saving grace of sitting next to the correct one on the keyboard.]
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 16, 1999).]
If you mean whiskey, the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean that evil drink that topples Christian men and women from the pinnacles of righteous and gracious living into the bottomless pits of degradation, shame, despair, helplessness, and hopelessness, then, my friend, I am opposed to it with every fiber of my being. However, if by whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the elixir of life, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer, the stimulating sip that puts a little spring in the step of an elderly gentleman on a frosty morning; if you mean that drink that enables man to magnify his joy, and to forget life's great tragedies and heartbreaks and sorrow; if you mean that drink the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars each year, that provides tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitifully aged and infirm, to build the finest highways, hospitals, universities, and community colleges in this nation, then my friend, I am absolutely, unequivocally in favor of it. This is my position, and as always, I refuse to be compromised on matters of principle.
--Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr, 1952 "Whiskey Speech"
By extension, your logic (that of you who insist that guns are unnecessary, and thus should be banned) should also include the banning of alcohol.
The train of logic is as follows:
(I'm certain the list could be longer if I gave it more thought.)
You can apply that sort of logic to any thing you dislike. It's still wrong to secure your own safety and prosperity at someone else's expense without their informed consent. To do so is one step short of enslavement. In short, it is tyrrany.
--Baloo
------------------
The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out, the conservative adopts them.
--Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 16, 1999).]
I'm not left wing. I support this measure. Definitely 100% for it. What I would like to see is adequate gun control properly enforced and the above penalties together in law. That oughta make one tough cookie against crime.
The availiability of guns through legal means makes things easier for gangs and criminals to obtain their weapons. A little gun control and judicial action can go a long way in preventing another massacre. And that's fine by me.
I won't further dispute your right to own a gun. You've made your point on that (actually, it was Baloo who made the points.....). Now if the US had Strict Gun Control laws like the Netherlands...... As I said earlier, like cars, it doesn't hurt to get a licence for your gun as well as registration.
*Police Officer Speak*: May I see your license and registration please?
------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation
With guns however, people deliberately target others with the sole intention of maiming or killing. That is the difference in this case, so I must again disagree. People killing themselves is one thing, but allowing others the opportunity to kill someone else is just plain ludicrous.
------------------
The line must be drawn here, this far, no further. Picard, First Contact
The line has to be drawn here, this far and no further. Quark, Dogs of War
(BTW, gang members under the age of 18, whether justifiably killed by police or shot by other gang members, make up a large percentage of those "children" killed by gunfire that the gun-grabbers use in their 'statistics.' Perhaps we should regulate gang membership?)
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
Except deaths caused by drunk drivers and so on.
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
If drink driving was legal, a lot more people would inevitably die. As I've argued with the gun issue, you can't completely eradicate gun related crimes and you also can't eradicate drink related crimes. You can however control them. If drink driving was legal, every time you walk somewhere, you'd be in danger of being killed because there could be a drink driver somewhere. With the legislation, this is controlled and it is much safer to walk the streets.
Guns work in the same way. If guns weren't so freely available as it is here in the UK, the risk of being killed by a gun is minimal. If however guns are freely available, there'd be a greater change of more poeple being victims of them.
Control is the key aspect of this. You control the usage, and minimise the risk.
------------------
The line must be drawn here, this far, no further. Picard, First Contact
The line has to be drawn here, this far and no further. Quark, Dogs of War
(In the US, shooting people is illegal, as is drunk driving. 
)
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
Why? Don't you LIKE children?
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
------------------
"Obesity. Adiposity. Corpulence. Whatever word you use, it represents one thing: being a big fatass."
Geraldo Rivera
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
The U.S. had a good chance to enforce their Gun-Control law. And yet the Conservatives and Pro-Gun Activists scrubbed it again. What's WITH these people?
------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation
When someone is convicted of a crime, the punishment of which includes forfeit of second amendment rights, their guns are most likely confiscated. Any weapons which were used in the commission of a crime or are patently illegal for the former owner to possess (shotguns with barrels less than 20" in length, fully automatic weapons for which the owner has no license, etc.) are never returned, and that is also very likely the fate of any other confiscated firearms, regardless of their legality.
Depending on the laws of the community (or state, or federal, depending on who has jurisdiction) the confiscated weapons which are illegal but not required for evidence will either be destroyed or added to the arsenal (battery is the "gunner's term) of the confiscating authority. Depending on the applicable laws, the remaining "legal" weapons will either be destroyed, auctioned off to a legal firearms dealer, auctioned off to a certified disposal company, or added to the confiscating authority's battery.
The person who formerly owned the guns is SOL (Seriously Out of Luck [G-rated definition]). If it once again becomes legal for the convicted felon to legally own guns, it would only be after he served the full term of his sentence or at the end of his parole, whichever is longer. I am not certain that a convicted felon may ever have his second amendment rights restored. In that case, he may never legally possess firearms again, nor may he legally attempt to obtain them, even if the means he uses would otherwise be legal.
Parole (for those who may not use the term in daily conversation) means that a convicted criminal has been released before the end of his term of imprisonment. It does not mean that all his civil rights are now in full force. He may not associate with known felons, may not drink intoxicating beverage, and may not violate the law in any way or he will be returned to prison. Persons on parole for a felony offense may not own, possess, or purchase firearms. Violation requires the felon to return to prison to serve out the remainder of his sentence. According to Federal law, an additional 5 years in federal prison is added on to the felon's sentence when the violation includes possession/use of a firearm.
Licensed firearms dealers (I have several friends who have dealer's licenses) must strictly observe the laws regarding who they may and may not legally sell a firearm to. They are subject to penalties much more severe than you or I if they were to sell a firearm to a person who may not legally possess or purchase them (and the penalties if you or I were to attempt to do so are quite severe, indeed). They may only sell firearms to legal residents of the state they are licensed in or other licensed dealers. If someone who may not legally possess firearms attempts to purchase a weapon, the dealer must inform the police immediately (and, of course, may not sell a firearm or even ammunition to that person). No-one can just walk in off the street and buy a gun.
If I were to go into Texas (the state next door) and see a gun I wanted to buy in a store, I could not buy it. I could, however, contact a dealer in my own state and have him purchase it for re-sale to me upon my return. I would still have to fill out all the applicable forms (any firearm) and wait the appropriate amount of time for a background check (for a handgun) before I could claim my purchase.
Possessing firearms is a responsibility I do not take lightly, nor is it a right I will willingly allow to be taken from me, especially since I neither aid nor encourage the people who misuse guns and cause all the uproar. I do not recommend you purchase firearms if you are not comfortable with the idea of carrying lethal force upon your person, but I do not appreciate the assumption that all firearms owners are a threat. This is as absurd as blaming all Arabs for middle-eastern terrorism, or blaming all blacks for the high crime rate in communities with a significant population of blacks (not all of which will have a high crime rate, by the way).
If you want to ban handguns, you should extend the logic to it's inevitable conclusion and begin setting up internment camps for potentially troublesome groups of people, so they can't cause trouble even if they wanted to. It's "guilty before innocent" applied with a very broad brush.
--Baloo
------------------
I once lost my corkscrew and had to live on food and water for several days
-W.C. Fields
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 22, 1999).]
) I gave the following answer. It's pretty long, so bear with me.
[Warning: This turned out to be rather long. You might want to cut-n-paste it into an HTML or text document and read it at your leisure. I'm going to post this at the forums, so I'm putting in HTML tags so you can see where it ought to be in italics, etc. I know you are from Canada where gun use is severely restricted and am not suggesting Canada change its laws unless they choose to do so. I am only making my case for the U.S.I am uncertain it would be wise to liberalize gun laws where they are already restrictive -- there is no tradition of gun lore in most places where guns are currently banned, such as well-known and widely-disseminated rules to safely handle them.
Sorry I ran on for so long.]
Good gun control consists on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Failing that, it is taking the guns out of their hands and locking them away for a very long time.
Project Exile, tested in Richmond, Virginia, proved to immediately cut crime and save lives because every violent felon caught with a gun goes to jail for 5 years, period. Just like the law says they should.
Federal law already has many provisions that, if enforced, would very effectively decrease violent crime. It's one of the reasons I get annoyed when people call for further restrictions on firearms ownership. It isn't the legal owners who are the problem, and the new laws will have no effect on the people who are already using guns criminally. It's already illegal for them to procure guns for the purpose of using them in the performance of a criminal act, it's illegal for them to have guns when they do commit a crime, whether the guns are used or not, and it's illegal to use a gun to commit a crime.
Banning all guns because some guns are used by criminals is morally equivalent to placing all newspapers under federal censorship because some information that is printed may incite civil disorder. It's happened before -- remember the riots in L.A. when Rodney King's police abusers were not convicted?
Should the government examine and approve all use of any potentially dangerous substance on a case-by-case basis? How about household cleaners? You might decide to poison someone with that box of D-Con Mouse-Pruf. Afer all, it is poison. Better get a license and prove you can use it responsibly. The federal officer will be by later to ensure you have it properly stored.
Beer? Let's see that Alcohol Consumption Certification Course Diploma. Hmmm... Sorry, but you are only certified for red wine (not white) and bourbon whiskey. Denied. By the way, you're under arrest for attempting to purchase beer without proper accreditation.
Cigarettes? Let's see that prescription. Good. Everything's in order. Proceed. Hope you don't mind the mandatory 5-day waiting period. You're completely out of cigarettes and are having a nicotine fit? Too bad. See ya in 5 days.
How about that fertilizer, "Mr. Farmer" (if that's your real name). Sure, it can be used to make your crops grow, but the same exact substance was used as a component in the bomb used to destroy the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Better show us a license. Better yet, get a federally-licensed fertilizer-applier to spray your farm. Sure it costs more and you don't make enough to pay for such things and still feed your family, but if it saves the life of even one child...
------------------
When only the police have guns, it's called a police state.
-- Bumper Sticker
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm
[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited December 22, 1999).]
Guns are the same. People will always be killed by guns. Does that mean that you just screw everyone else and just make them more freely available?
"Shit, after all the money we've spent on this, a person's still died. It's not working, so lets pull the plug"
Yes it's tragic if one life is lost, but if you consider all the people who could have been killed, you'll find that the control aspect is worth it.
------------------
Worf: He is an overgrown child and she is...confused.
O'Brien: It could still work.
------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Ou tou kratountos h� polis nomizetai" - Creon
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
Some logic you must have.
------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation
------------------
Mephistopheles's Repossessions and Furnace Works
C/O
Mephistopheles, Cain, Brutus, Medici, Torquemada, Richelieu,
Metternich, Tweed, Rasputin & Daley, Attorneys-at-Law
1 Perdition-on-the-Styx Plaza
Dis, The Nether Regions
"A Hell of a Law Firm"
Entirely incorrect. Possibly slander. Demonstrably untrue, as in the case of Richmond. Gun laws that keep them out of the hands of CRIMINALS, while still allowing honest citizens to possess them, have ALWAYS been supported by both the NRA and myself.
It is rather, the 'social engineers' who pervade the legal system, plea-bargaining away most lesser charges, running police departments and courts like schoolyards, allowing paroles to slip through the system, and calling prohibiting ANYTHING to felons "racist" (you know why) who are responsible for the lack of enforcement.
What you have repeatedly failed to do is show EXACTLY how your proposals will help alleviate the present situation... especially when case studies have all shown to the contrary.
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
I'm not talking about taking alcohol and guns away completely. I'm talking about control. If you control drink driving, there's less risk of someone being run over by a drunk driver. Same with guns - the outlets where guns are available need to be cut back drastically so they aren't as freely available. I do understand that most of you across the pond fully support your right to own guns and potentially kill others. Although I don't support it, I'm not naive enough to believe that the situation here in the UK can be transferred to the US. You can however make guns less freely available which is what I'm advocating.
I'm not sure if this is done already, but background checks into the buyers could be carried out before handing over a weapon. It is a very large country and may not be feasible, but it's an idea. All the recent problems surrounding guns have been from them falling into the wrong hands. Before you say it, if people REALLY want a gun, they will probably be able to get it but I doubt everyone will go to drastic lengths to break the law and obtain a gun just for the sheer heck of it.
I'm sure you have some laws there where it makes it difficult for certain people to buy guns - enforce them. If laws are just there for show, they don't do anything. Ever since the 50s and 60s, there has been a lot of anti racism/sexism legislation all over the world. Imagine what the world would be like today if they weren't enforced. You still get racism/sexism today, but not as much as there likely would have been because attitudes have changed. People realise that racial discrimination is wrong and legislation has enforced that.
Clinton tried to get tougher gun controls through, but was blocked. This just shows the way attitudes are and how politics comes before saving peoples lives. Education is a way of changing this, but it'll take time - a long time. You need to start with the young and teach them about gun use because although you'll probably never stop them ever owning a gun, they will own one some day. If you teach them the rights and wrongs of gun use at a very early age, it could stick.
I don't know if these ideas will work, but then again, no-one ever knows if it's going to work until it's put into practice. Case studies are fine, but how many times have people seen an idea look good or bad on paper, but it's turned out the opposite in reality? People are dying unnecessarily already and something needs to be done to control this.
------------------
Worf: He is an overgrown child and she is...confused.
O'Brien: It could still work.
I'm sure. It IS done already. Thus far, its advocates claim it has prevented some 3000 people from obtaining guns.
This is all well and good... until you follow up, and discover that the overwhelming number of people refused purchase weren't actually guilty of anything... they just happened to have the same name or address as somebody who WAS prohibited from owning one. Or the computer system glitched. Or any number of things.
Not to mention the potential abuses of this power...
"Orion Syndicate doesn't share our political viewpoints? Well, let's just type his name in here under 'prohibited'... This group opposes us too? let's plug in their entire membership roster. Then, if any of them already have guns, and we want to 'get' them, they can be arrested for illegal possession."
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
------------------
"Arthur hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realised there was a contradiction there and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife."
------------------
"20th Century, go to sleep."
--
R.E.M.
------------------
"Arthur hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realised there was a contradiction there and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife."
------------------
"20th Century, go to sleep."
--
R.E.M.
You're BOTH right, and you've been successfully manipulated into disagreeing.
Today's Republican and Democratic parties ARE essentially the same salad, with different dressings. They take their marching orders from what are essentially the same folks, while paying lip service to the people in their respective "camps."
And it works frightfully well.
Currently, it's something like this:
1. Tragedy occurs.
2. Side A drums up propaganda to create new laws.
3. Side B creates halfhearted, but apparently ironclad, resistance to side A, but calculatedly fails in propaganda war.
Result: Further defections to side A, despite law's ineffectiveness. Stage set for second tragedy, cycle begins anew. Objective of Control met.
(subplot): Side B gets everybody worked up over threat that fails to materialize. Side B looks like 'kooks.' Further defections to side A. Further objectives of Control emplaced.
Paranoid? Maybe. But why is it nobody ever seems to check the interrelationships of so many folks who "seem" to be on opposite sides.. like when Clinton was letting Bush's CIA use Arkansas airfields for CIA business?
------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson
The Christian's Guide to Small Arms
and this one also from the same fine folks at the Gospel Plow where the phrase "God bless guns" is taken literally:
Small Arms Tactics and Individual Weapon Systems as it concerns Christian Freemens
Now everyone can see how far the 7.62 NATO round can penetrate the basic heathen and or infidel, which if you don't know it, is just about everyone.
------------------
It's no use. I guess I'll have to leave all my money to the Egg Advisory Council. Eggs have gotten quite a bad rap lately, you know, Smithers.
~C. Montgomery Burns
[This message has been edited by Jay (edited January 01, 2000).]