I can find PLENTY of resources pointing to Australia experiencing a rise in violent crimes since their gun ban...I would not consider them an great place to start an argument about gun control...
Edit: I just wanted to add a little onto your point. USA is more like Chicago than it is Australia. We do not sit on an island out in the middle of nowhere. To be effective, don't you mean that it would have to be "continent" wide? Otherwise, wouldn't people just go outside country borders to get their guns and bring them into the USA? How do you propose getting rid of all guns in South America and Mexico and prevent an illegal market from forming if you just make them illegal in the USA?
where is the rise in australian violent crimes? i read australian news sites daily. i had an ex g/f who was aussie, so keeping up with aussie news is an old habit of mine..... one of my best friends is an aussie. i am interested to see the information you have that i don't.
you are assuming that someone determined to commit these crimes is actually going to be so inclined to go through the trouble of going to south america or canada to get the guns. most shooters have ready and easy access to them. those guns are low hanging fruit. that, the easy access to guns, is the root of the problem. if access was more difficult, logic would dictate that that would reduce future gun violence and mass murders. hell, it would reduce suicides and accidental shootings as well.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
actually, when it comes to public safety, I certainly do.
No, you don't. If my actions are not harming another individual then I should be able to do what I want and determine my own needs. Besides the practice of a person owning a firearm does not threaten public safety.
tell that to the family of the 6 year old who got killed by a 4 year old.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I can find PLENTY of resources pointing to Australia experiencing a rise in violent crimes since their gun ban...I would not consider them an great place to start an argument about gun control...
Edit: I just wanted to add a little onto your point. USA is more like Chicago than it is Australia. We do not sit on an island out in the middle of nowhere. To be effective, don't you mean that it would have to be "continent" wide? Otherwise, wouldn't people just go outside country borders to get their guns and bring them into the USA? How do you propose getting rid of all guns in South America and Mexico and prevent an illegal market from forming if you just make them illegal in the USA?
where is the rise in australian violent crimes? i read australian news sites daily. i had an ex g/f who was aussie, so keeping up with aussie news is an old habit of mine..... one of my best friends is an aussie. i am interested to see the information you have that i don't.
you are assuming that someone determined to commit these crimes is actually going to be so inclined to go through the trouble of going to south america or canada to get the guns. most shooters have ready and easy access to them. those guns are low hanging fruit. that, the easy access to guns, is the root of the problem. if access was more difficult, logic would dictate that that would reduce future gun violence and mass murders. hell, it would reduce suicides and accidental shootings as well.
I think its very bad form to just assume the person who wants to go on a shooting spree is going to do it no matter what.
this is an excellent point. I mean, by the logic that if all criminals all have a way of doing what they want anyway, why have any laws at all?
and that's the logic of the pro gun crowd. :fp:
Okay, when has the government stepping in and "banning" things stopped criminals from using the laws to their advantage? The war on drugs seems to have just created a war at our borders, for example. Before the war on drugs, people could go to the store and essentially buy heroine, but there was not a drug epidemic back then? hmmm. Alcohol and cigarettes have caused way more deaths in this country than guns. What happened when we outlawed alcohol? Maybe our funds spent on better education is a better route than new laws?
Okay, when has the government stepping in and "banning" things stopped criminals from using the laws to their advantage? The war on drugs seems to have just created a war at our borders, for example. Before the war on drugs, people could go to the store and essentially buy heroine, but there was not a drug epidemic back then? hmmm. Alcohol and cigarettes have caused way more deaths in this country than guns. What happened when we outlawed alcohol? Maybe our funds spent on better education is a better route than new laws?
edit, i forgot to add the :fp:
please stop comparing alcohol and pharmaceuticals to guns. there is no comparison. one is invented to kill things, the others aren't, but can be fatal if abused. there is nothing similar at all.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Okay, when has the government stepping in and "banning" things stopped criminals from using the laws to their advantage? The war on drugs seems to have just created a war at our borders, for example. Before the war on drugs, people could go to the store and essentially buy heroine, but there was not a drug epidemic back then? hmmm. Alcohol and cigarettes have caused way more deaths in this country than guns. What happened when we outlawed alcohol? Maybe our funds spent on better education is a better route than new laws?
edit, i forgot to add the :fp:
please stop comparing alcohol and pharmaceuticals to guns. there is no comparison. one is invented to kill things, the others aren't, but can be fatal if abused. there is nothing similar at all.
The laws that I mentioned are similar...I do not want to get into an argument about the comparison either. My point was that the regulations and laws surrounding other areas have not been very effective. Comparing laws with laws if you will. Although I would argue that guns are also used to protect things from being killed as well.
where are the mass murders? where are the mass shootings? i do not see those represented in your stats.
and stop playing the fucking "inability to defend themselves" card. it is invalid because that means you would have to assume that all or most of those victims would have been carrying a gun at the time the crimes were committed. that assumption is laughable.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
where are the mass murders? where are the mass shootings? i do not see those represented in your stats.
and stop playing the fucking "inability to defend themselves" card. it is invalid because that means you would have to assume that all or most of those victims would have been carrying a gun at the time the crimes were committed. that assumption is laughable.
I was not arguing against mass shootings or mass murders, but violent crimes as a whole. And it's laughable to ignore the fact that there is a correlation between the rise of violent crimes and timing of the gun control bills. I think that's the whole argument here. Should a law be passed disarming the people as a whole from protecting themselves from rape, robbery, assault just because a person decided to go on a mass murdering spree? A couple incidents involving a mass versus a collective of many many more incidents happening one at a time? What are some other ways of taking incentives away from people that wish to do harm other than banning guns? What role does violent media play? I think it's important to look into those avenues before immediately acting on impulse after a tragedy.
Okay, when has the government stepping in and "banning" things stopped criminals from using the laws to their advantage? The war on drugs seems to have just created a war at our borders, for example. Before the war on drugs, people could go to the store and essentially buy heroine, but there was not a drug epidemic back then? hmmm. Alcohol and cigarettes have caused way more deaths in this country than guns. What happened when we outlawed alcohol? Maybe our funds spent on better education is a better route than new laws?
edit, i forgot to add the :fp:
so is it your assertion that all laws are useless?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
keep posting random articles about people defending themselves with handguns or rifles. that's not the main issue here, but you gun folks tend to ignore that. no one cares about your one gun you have in the house.
we care about the semi automatic rifles that people seem to think they need.
You don't have the right to tell me what I need.
Actually, he has the right to tell you anything he wants to. And you have the right not to listen to him.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Okay, when has the government stepping in and "banning" things stopped criminals from using the laws to their advantage? The war on drugs seems to have just created a war at our borders, for example. Before the war on drugs, people could go to the store and essentially buy heroine, but there was not a drug epidemic back then? hmmm. Alcohol and cigarettes have caused way more deaths in this country than guns. What happened when we outlawed alcohol? Maybe our funds spent on better education is a better route than new laws?
edit, i forgot to add the :fp:
so is it your assertion that all laws are useless?
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
I find it funny that you accused the left of scare tactics and then unleash one yourself.
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
do you hunt with a machine gun? if not, then your points are moo. like a cow's opinion.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
do you hunt with a machine gun? if not, then your points are moo. like a cow's opinion.
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
I find it funny that you accused the left of scare tactics and then unleash one yourself.
First of all, where have I accused the left of scare tactics? Secondly, it's not a scare tactic, it's the truth. Somewhere in the range of 30,000 people have cancelled their hunting vacations to CO because of these bills. Gun manufacturers are getting the hell out of these states. It's called backlash. Both sides of the argument are guilty of using "scare tactics". A few people have even been exploiting children and victims of tragedies...
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
do you hunt with a machine gun? if not, then your points are moo. like a cow's opinion.
Wow, what an awesome opinion. Such an inteligent response is what I love about AMT. "Machine guns"!?!?!? Really?
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
do you hunt with a machine gun? if not, then your points are moo. like a cow's opinion.
Wow, what an awesome opinion. Such an inteligent response is what I love about AMT. "Machine guns"!?!?!? Really?
my point, which was obviously missed, is that no one is trying to take away your hunting rifle or your handgun that you keep at home. is that clearer?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
my point, which was obviously missed, is that no one is trying to take away your hunting rifle or your handgun that you keep at home. is that clearer?
You are mistaken my friend. There are some politicians supporting these bills that have no clue what they are talking about and signing off on things that would make even the most basic shotguns and hunting rifles illegal due to technicalities. My .223 and .308 is used for hunting and protecting myself from feral hogs while working...and there's plenty of people trying to make it illegal to own those. You still didn't answer my question about the boycotts and gun manufacturers jumping ship?
my point, which was obviously missed, is that no one is trying to take away your hunting rifle or your handgun that you keep at home. is that clearer?
You are mistaken my friend. There are some politicians supporting these bills that have no clue what they are talking about and signing off on things that would make even the most basic shotguns and hunting rifles illegal due to technicalities. My .223 and .308 is used for hunting and protecting myself from feral hogs while working...and there's plenty of people trying to make it illegal to own those. You still didn't answer my question about the boycotts and gun manufacturers jumping ship?
Economics should be the least of concerns when taking measures to increase public safety. There's no place for your question in this discussion.
Just out of my own curiosity, though, how does everyone here feel about the gun/ammo manufacturers packing up and moving their businesses to pro-gun states? Also, what are your thoughts about hunters boycotting states pushing strict legislation? Seems like politics are making some states lose a LOT of tax dollars right now. Will you be supporting the comming bills to raise your taxes to make up for the lack of revenue brought in by hunters? Are you comfortable with more wildlife being all over the road and moving into suburban areas due to the lack of population control? I'm willing to bet that farmers are not going to like the extra wildlife their crops!
I find it funny that you accused the left of scare tactics and then unleash one yourself.
First of all, where have I accused the left of scare tactics? Secondly, it's not a scare tactic, it's the truth. Somewhere in the range of 30,000 people have cancelled their hunting vacations to CO because of these bills. Gun manufacturers are getting the hell out of these states. It's called backlash. Both sides of the argument are guilty of using "scare tactics". A few people have even been exploiting children and victims of tragedies...
sorry I mistake it was someone else who was accusing the left of scare tactics. secondly, can you show any links that prove your point about what you just stated.
sorry I mistake it was someone else who was accusing the left of scare tactics. secondly, can you show any links that prove your point about what you just stated.
There's several companies out there. There's a whole list of manufacturers that are moving from New York, Colorado, and Connecticut...but if you're really interested, you can google "gun manufacurers leaving" and find plenty results. If you google "hunters boycott Colorado", there's plenty of articles there too. It's a big deal. I don't think a lot of people realized the economic impact of pushing this legislation. Some of the laws are so loosly written that hunters are affraid of getting arrested becuase their guns can technically "accept high capacity magazines"...even if it might take a lot of modification to the firearm.
my point, which was obviously missed, is that no one is trying to take away your hunting rifle or your handgun that you keep at home. is that clearer?
You are mistaken my friend. There are some politicians supporting these bills that have no clue what they are talking about and signing off on things that would make even the most basic shotguns and hunting rifles illegal due to technicalities. My .223 and .308 is used for hunting and protecting myself from feral hogs while working...and there's plenty of people trying to make it illegal to own those. You still didn't answer my question about the boycotts and gun manufacturers jumping ship?
Economics should be the least of concerns when taking measures to increase public safety. There's no place for your question in this discussion.
Even if economics could potentially decrease public safety? Where do the funds for roads, police, other civil services come from?
sorry I mistake it was someone else who was accusing the left of scare tactics. secondly, can you show any links that prove your point about what you just stated.
There's several companies out there. There's a whole list of manufacturers that are moving from New York, Colorado, and Connecticut...but if you're really interested, you can google "gun manufacurers leaving" and find plenty results. If you google "hunters boycott Colorado", there's plenty of articles there too. It's a big deal. I don't think a lot of people realized the economic impact of pushing this legislation. Some of the laws are so loosly written that hunters are affraid of getting arrested becuase their guns can technically "accept high capacity magazines"...even if it might take a lot of modification to the firearm.
well here is one article that i found from foxnews.
You are mistaken my friend. There are some politicians supporting these bills that have no clue what they are talking about and signing off on things that would make even the most basic shotguns and hunting rifles illegal due to technicalities. My .223 and .308 is used for hunting and protecting myself from feral hogs while working...and there's plenty of people trying to make it illegal to own those. You still didn't answer my question about the boycotts and gun manufacturers jumping ship?
good for those politicians. I was talking in the context of this thread.
I don't give a shit about the financial fallout of it any more than I'd be concerned about the fallout of banning cigarettes and the government losing the tax revenue from that. money should NEVER, EVER, trump public safety. the government would simply have to make due and make changes in the economical structure.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
sorry I mistake it was someone else who was accusing the left of scare tactics. secondly, can you show any links that prove your point about what you just stated.
There's several companies out there. There's a whole list of manufacturers that are moving from New York, Colorado, and Connecticut...but if you're really interested, you can google "gun manufacurers leaving" and find plenty results. If you google "hunters boycott Colorado", there's plenty of articles there too. It's a big deal. I don't think a lot of people realized the economic impact of pushing this legislation. Some of the laws are so loosly written that hunters are affraid of getting arrested becuase their guns can technically "accept high capacity magazines"...even if it might take a lot of modification to the firearm.
well here is one article that i found from foxnews.
it actually looks like it not as big of a problem as you state.
lol, Even I know not to go to Fox news as a reliable source!!!!! I was reading a hunting forum the other day and a guide from CO said that he had about 60 cancelations in the past 3 weeks. I can't remember what town he was from, but it was one of the smaller ones that depend on hunters to provide revenue. I'll try to dig it up for you.
You are mistaken my friend. There are some politicians supporting these bills that have no clue what they are talking about and signing off on things that would make even the most basic shotguns and hunting rifles illegal due to technicalities. My .223 and .308 is used for hunting and protecting myself from feral hogs while working...and there's plenty of people trying to make it illegal to own those. You still didn't answer my question about the boycotts and gun manufacturers jumping ship?
good for those politicians. I was talking in the context of this thread.
I don't give a shit about the financial fallout of it any more than I'd be concerned about the fallout of banning cigarettes and the government losing the tax revenue from that. money should NEVER, EVER, trump public safety. the government would simply have to make due and make changes in the economical structure.
I still fail to understand how it is a public safety issue and not a political one? There's a whole other side of the fence that believes pushing these laws is going to adversly effect public safety. I guess we'll see what happens...And "good for those politicians"? I didn't think you supported the ban of even the most basic hunting rifles/shotguns? I guess I was mistaken...
Comments
you are assuming that someone determined to commit these crimes is actually going to be so inclined to go through the trouble of going to south america or canada to get the guns. most shooters have ready and easy access to them. those guns are low hanging fruit. that, the easy access to guns, is the root of the problem. if access was more difficult, logic would dictate that that would reduce future gun violence and mass murders. hell, it would reduce suicides and accidental shootings as well.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
tell that to the family of the 6 year old who got killed by a 4 year old.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
this is an excellent point. I mean, by the logic that if all criminals all have a way of doing what they want anyway, why have any laws at all?
and that's the logic of the pro gun crowd. :fp:
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
We can start with these stats by the Australian Institute of Criminology (although your friends may have done much more extensive research :fp: ) Looks like it created a free range for rapists! Remember that it passed in 1997. Most of these are stats from 1997-2007...at best, it looks like the gun control efforts were not very effective at reducing criminals from using guns and at worse very effective at causing people to be unable to defend themselves from rape, assault, robbery. Go ask your ex-gf, media outlets, and best friend how their statistics compare though, as they should be the best resources...
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violen ... sault.html
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violen ... sault.html
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violen ... bbery.html
http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violen ... ctims.html
edit, i forgot to add the :fp:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
and stop playing the fucking "inability to defend themselves" card. it is invalid because that means you would have to assume that all or most of those victims would have been carrying a gun at the time the crimes were committed. that assumption is laughable.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
so is it your assertion that all laws are useless?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
It's my assertation that *many* laws are useless.
I find it funny that you accused the left of scare tactics and then unleash one yourself.
do you hunt with a machine gun? if not, then your points are moo. like a cow's opinion.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
And the country survived. The government did not ban all guns. Life went on.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
First of all, where have I accused the left of scare tactics? Secondly, it's not a scare tactic, it's the truth. Somewhere in the range of 30,000 people have cancelled their hunting vacations to CO because of these bills. Gun manufacturers are getting the hell out of these states. It's called backlash. Both sides of the argument are guilty of using "scare tactics". A few people have even been exploiting children and victims of tragedies...
my point, which was obviously missed, is that no one is trying to take away your hunting rifle or your handgun that you keep at home. is that clearer?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Economics should be the least of concerns when taking measures to increase public safety. There's no place for your question in this discussion.
sorry I mistake it was someone else who was accusing the left of scare tactics. secondly, can you show any links that prove your point about what you just stated.
Even if economics could potentially decrease public safety? Where do the funds for roads, police, other civil services come from?
well here is one article that i found from foxnews.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03 ... -gun-laws/
it actually looks like it not as big of a problem as you state.
good for those politicians. I was talking in the context of this thread.
I don't give a shit about the financial fallout of it any more than I'd be concerned about the fallout of banning cigarettes and the government losing the tax revenue from that. money should NEVER, EVER, trump public safety. the government would simply have to make due and make changes in the economical structure.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014