Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why Fear an Armed Public?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   
You picked a good screen name.

Good luck skipping through life whistling "Dixie."




posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 12:44 AM
link   
GradyPhilpott,
A question if you will, why is it that the states that have the most lax gun control laws on average have higher crime rates?



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
GradyPhilpott,
A question if you will, why is it that the states that have the most lax gun control laws on average have higher crime rates?


I'm not sure how you'd define 'laxer'. However, the cities with the most gun control in the states are the most nightmarishly crime-ridden: DC, Deeeeeeeeeetroit, and LA are prime examples. Also, found a nice little article on Wikipedia which makes an interesting point:


In addition, the firearms crime rate in the United Kingdom has massively increased since an almost total ban on handguns in 1997/8, with violent gun crimes, including shootings to death, increasing at around 40% year on year, for over five years, despite otherwise declining levels of reported crime levels. (Note however that victimisation levels have reportedly risen, as has non-recorded crime due to apathy and lack of police response.) Some claim that this demonstrates a negative correlation between more restrictive gun laws and violent crimes involving firearms.
from en.wikipedia.org...

As well, what about the statistic that says somewhere around two and a half million people a year in the US alone used a firearm for self-defence or to prevent a crime (the larger part of the time to prevent a crime, without the weapon being discharged?

Are you factoring in the social conditions of areas with high incidences of gun violence?

And, finally, if gun control is the the sole saving grace needed for a world full of fuzzy bunnies and free love, how come Israel and Switzerland have ridiculously high gun ownership rates, yet remarkably low crime rates. No, snide comments about 'oppression' don't count.

Wikipedia has a great article on gun control. Both sides of the argument are presented with fair accuracy.

DE



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 02:37 AM
link   
DE

Laxer: not as stringent, being more lax in comparison to others.

What I can’t believe is that you put Detroit on your list! Detroit is in Michigan, a state that has some the most lax gun laws in the US, with the exception of Texas.
As for DC it had a hellish crime rate due to chronic under funding for their police force, unlike most cities that had city, county and state revenues to work with DC only had city property taxes to work with, with low land value you have lower tax revenue.
Now we have LA, with large housing projects and due to high unemployment in the 80s the life of crime seemed a good choice for many at the time with the money to be made in the burgeoning crack industry. The gang wars started up between the infamous “Bloods and Crips”, these wars over territory continue to this day with many other gangs involved as well.

Israel dose have ridiculously high gun owner ship with a low crime rate yes, but when you spend all your time trying to make sure that your not going to get blown up by some nut job or in a war of self defense or just randomly attacking one of your neighbors you have little time left to rob people I suppose.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
You picked a good screen name.

Good luck skipping through life whistling "Dixie."


Touché! Using my very own screen name against me, you cove!

But I shall avoid taking your advice if that's alright. Prancing and whistling an absurd tune will no doubt merely encourage rogues and rascals to visit harm upon my gentle countenance, as I jauntily swagger through the ghouls that make up..... the Public.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I have a concealed weapons permit. I also have a fire extinguisher. I've never had cause to use either but am glad I have both just in case. I do believe that responsible citizens should have the right to own and carry a firearm. That doesn't mean everyone should have that right or that we should have the right to carry a weapon in every circumstance. For example, people who suffer mental health problems, substance abusers, felons (and people charged with certain misdemeanors), etc. should not be allowed licenses nor should we be allowed to carry when drinking. In addition, I believe that every gun owner should be required to take a standardized course on gun use and safety; should be required to provide proof that they have the means necessary to securely store their firearms under lock and key; should have their licenses suspended pending forfeiture if charged with a weapons violation (like carrying while drinking); should have their license suspended if a weapon registered to them is used in a crime or found not in the licensee's control and not reported stolen. Just a few suggestions. It is a right with an enormous responsibility and should, I feel, be treated as such.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
What I can’t believe is that you put Detroit on your list! Detroit is in Michigan, a state that has some the most lax gun laws in the US, with the exception of Texas.


The reason I asked about 'laxer' is that almost every state in your country has a method of getting a CCW permit. 39 states are shall-issue. Only two bar the practice completely. A few allow open carry.

The reason I put Detroit on the list is because the city itself, like New York, bars concealed carry (at least to my knowledge). While each has a seperate cause for high crime rates, why isn't it repeated in other, similar cases? Seattle has biker gangs controlling the meth trade. Yet, it quite a bit safer than LA as one example.

DE



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
GradyPhilpott,
A question if you will, why is it that the states that have the most lax gun control laws on average have higher crime rates?


You're gonna need to show me some verifiable stats before I even begin to examine this statement. Your assertion is bullocks at absolute best. I'll be waiting for those stats!



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   
I am a heavily armed civilian with over 20 firearms to my name. I have a CCW permit from the state of Ohio and I do carry (So muggers better look out!). I would not hesitate to put a bullet through some perp's head in order to protect myself, my family or my property. I have no criminal record, have never been arrested and have never been accused of a crime. I am not a violent person nor do I look for trouble. My RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS is protected fully by the Constitution of the United States of America and is not to be infringed upon by ANYONE! I am simply keeping the playing field level because a.) Criminals will always have guns, be they legal or not and b.) because our Founding Father's believed that an armed public could protect against despotic or dictatorial regimes from using a military to take over our great nation. Ergo, it is my right AND my responsibility as a patriot, a citizen, a husband and a father to keep and bear arms. PERIOD! We're done here!



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
DE
The differences between Seattle and LA are many and to compare the two in such a broad stroke does not work. LA has a much larger disenfranchised pool of people, the poor have much larger rates of drug and alcohol abuse meaning that there are far more addicts in LA as apposed Seattle, even when you look at it per capita LA dominates Seattle in drug use. LA is one of the largest drug ports in the Union, with billions of dollars in drugs coming by air, land and sea. Seattle does not have such a large drug trade be it domestic (used in Seattle), or export (drugs being shipped through). Meth is a cheap domestic drug, and there is not enough money in it yet to start major drug wars in Seattle. And might I add letting the gangs have cheap access to firearms is not the way to end violence on the streets.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 12:00 PM
link   
You are of the opinion that by making firearms illegal that there would no longer be access to "Cheap firearms" by the criminal element??? Sorry, but you're wrong there pal! It's called the black market. Legal firearms are NOT cheap to come by. Criminal purchase unmarked weapons underground - not at the local sporting goods store!



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Who said that I am for making firearms illegal? Not I says me. I own a gun, a .357 magnum.
And yes obviously the thousands of gun stores operating through out the hoods and projects of America are frequented by only the most upright and law abiding citizens. No they never sell gun to criminals. Dude, really come on.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo
BULLOCKS!

You're gonna need to show me some verifiable stats before I even begin to examine this statement. Your assertion is bullocks at absolute best. I'll be waiting for those stats!


I've never heard a native American use the terms bullocks in that sense, only British.

I doubt that anything I can produce will convince you, but here goes:

johnrlott.tripod.com...

www.lewrockwell.com...

www.press.uchicago.edu...

www.gunowners.org...

www.gunowners.org...

www.nraila.org...

www.chronwatch.com...

www.exit109.com...

www.jpfo.org...

seven_myths_of_gun_control

www.huppi.com...

.iol.co.za

www.twincities.com...

Google is your Friend


[edit on 2006/8/30 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Retseh


I know people who have carried for 20 years, they are happy, socially successful individuals who regard such actions as nothing more than common sense in a nation that permits them that privilege.


Couldn't let this one go by...

The nation does not "permit us a privilege".
We are born with the right, no exceptions. That is the law of the land, whether anyone is for it or against it.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowbear

The nation does not "permit us a privilege".

We are born with the right, no exceptions. That is the law of the land, whether anyone is for it or against it.


This is the truth. The Constitution does not grant rights, it acknowledges rights endowed by our Creator.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed....

The Declaration of Independence


[edit on 2006/8/30 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 10:44 PM
link   
It's more than that, though. It's common sense. The expression used at the range is "Better judged by twelve than carried by six."

'Common sense' and 'situational awareness' aren't a whole hell of a lot of good when you're asleep at night. Someone breaks in with a sharpened screwdriver, a crowdbar or Lord knows what else, and you want to plea with them, for your life, in your own home? You want to leave your well-being and life in the hands of a man who may decide that your answers are 'not good enough' and break your legs or stab you for it?

No, of course not. Pleading your case to an armed intruder is nonsense. Enforcing your right to freedom, safety and peace of mind with the sound of a shotgun being racked makes a whole lot more sense than rolling the dice.

DE



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I really liked the seven myths article, very good points made!


Awesome thread BTW.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
No one fears an armed populace more than government. That is why we must all stand together, as Americans (I'm sorry about the rest of you), to insure that our Second Amendment rights are never destroyed.

This is just one example of the effort by some to disarm America and the noble efforts by some to prevent such:
[edit on 2006/7/29 by GradyPhilpott]


As long as the USA has an armed populace then it will be a free country. Look at much of the rest of the developed world with strict gun control laws. They can swoop down at will on the people and all we can do is beg them for mercy. Don't let it happen to your country no matter what.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 01:45 PM
link   
There is an old saying...I venture to guess it dates back to the westward expansion. An armed society is a polite society. You may take that any way you choose...
. To me that means if you rudely accost me and demand my wallet or watch, or even my Nikes...you may have a problem headed your way...or you may not...its that uncertainty that deters many would be muggers or worse, rapists. If carrying of weapons is totally curtailed where is the deterent?

My house currently plays host to four weapons of various types: My fathers SW.38 special revolver. One twelve guage shotgun, single barrel. and two black powder rifles, and numerous very sharp knives that a kindly old ROK marine taught me how to use some years back, though kindly and ROK marine are not usually used in the same sentence
. I forgot to mention, the revolver and shotgun are loaded, and where I have access to them at all times. Paranoid? No, I prefer to call it prepared...

These things are tools, nothing more. I care for them much the same way I do my lawnmower, because when I need them, I am not going to have time to wonder if they are going to work. God forbid that moment should ever come, however, if it does I don't intend to be found wanting...

[edit on 5-9-2006 by seagull]





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join