It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by thepresidentsbrain
I REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO THE MEDIA FEAR MONGERING AND PARANOIA that drives citizens to be afraid and mistrustful of each other, rather than be afraid of the real criminals -
-corupt politicians and the military-police-prison-security-industrial-capitalist-complex.
Originally posted by DeusEx
Originally posted by Clipper
With all due respect, there are over 12,600 murders in USA a year. That's 20 times more people who have killed each other in USA since 9/11 than those who died on that day. That is a massacre.
The question should be, how do Americans defend themselves? Because whatever they are doing, it is not working.
Something the British should note- state to state, city to city, laws vary in the US. In fact, the most violent cities in the country are the ones with the MOST gun control. Washington, LA, Detroit and New York are the five cities in the country that have the most gun control, and the most crime respectively. Also, the irregularity of the gun control laws means that criminals can head two states over, buy a weapon fairly easily, adn bring it back someplace where people do not have the ability to defend themselves as easily.
For instance, Texas is one of the safest, most polite states in the country. It also provides legal protection for firearms owners, and many people in the state carry concealed. Again, look at the incident at the Texas Courthouse where a madman went on a shooting spree, and a gun owner saved the lives of two or possibly more people.
DE
Originally posted by Clipper
I suggest those big cities might have more gun control BECAUSE gun crime was out of control. It does not prove that less gun control makes a place safer.
Then again, it certainly doesn't prove that gun control is making those cities any safer, does it?
You illustrate how safe Texas is by referring to a madman on a shooting spree. Sorry but that doesn't instill much confidence. It sounds like a cowboy movie. Texas is a vast place. It is when you have ineffectually policed and divided cities, with high population concentation, ghettos, drugs and gangs, that crime is likely to thrive. So no surprise the cities of Texas don't compare to those you mentioned.
To be honest, shooting sprees are not unique to America. In comparison to the Tyler, Texas shooting spree (the case I mentioned), we have the Port Arthur Massacre, with its thirty-five dead. In both cases were maniacs with automatic weapons. The difference is, of course, that in Tyler only one person was killed.
As for other cities in America, let's think about this carefully. Let's say I'm a burglar, or a rapist, or a mugger. I might have a knife or a gun, but would I believe it's worth the risk to attack an armed target? Probably not. The higher the proportion of protection given to criminals legally, and the less citizens are willing to defend themselves with potentially lethal force, determines how much crime is likely. Criminals are stupid, not suicidal.
I have no doubt that if guns and carry knives were outlawed in America and those laws were rigourously enforced, murder rates would plunge. Carrying a gun again comes back to insecurity. I suggest, it is those that feel they need to prove their masculinity that need a weapon to compensate for what they fear they lack. They feel they have to prove something. I suggest there is a lot of repressed homosexuality in Texas and that goes to the top.
Ohh, attacks on gun-owner's sexuality now? I thought this was a debate. Pity. Well, let me tell you about here in Canada, where gun laws and carry laws are rigoriously enforced. Guess what? Our crime rate is skyrocketing. All those fancy laws that are meant to keep guns out of criminal hands don't work. They used to, sure, but now we're having crime shoot right back up as criminals figure out the basic fact that if guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
DE
Originally posted by DeusEx
Originally posted by Clipper
I suggest those big cities might have more gun control BECAUSE gun crime was out of control. It does not prove that less gun control makes a place safer.
Then again, it certainly doesn't prove that gun control is making those cities any safer, does it?
You illustrate how safe Texas is by referring to a madman on a shooting spree. Sorry but that doesn't instill much confidence. It sounds like a cowboy movie. Texas is a vast place. It is when you have ineffectually policed and divided cities, with high population concentation, ghettos, drugs and gangs, that crime is likely to thrive. So no surprise the cities of Texas don't compare to those you mentioned.
To be honest, shooting sprees are not unique to America. In comparison to the Tyler, Texas shooting spree (the case I mentioned), we have the Port Arthur Massacre, with its thirty-five dead. In both cases were maniacs with automatic weapons. The difference is, of course, that in Tyler only one person was killed.
As for other cities in America, let's think about this carefully. Let's say I'm a burglar, or a rapist, or a mugger. I might have a knife or a gun, but would I believe it's worth the risk to attack an armed target? Probably not. The higher the proportion of protection given to criminals legally, and the less citizens are willing to defend themselves with potentially lethal force, determines how much crime is likely. Criminals are stupid, not suicidal.
I have no doubt that if guns and carry knives were outlawed in America and those laws were rigourously enforced, murder rates would plunge. Carrying a gun again comes back to insecurity. I suggest, it is those that feel they need to prove their masculinity that need a weapon to compensate for what they fear they lack. They feel they have to prove something. I suggest there is a lot of repressed homosexuality in Texas and that goes to the top.
Ohh, attacks on gun-owner's sexuality now? I thought this was a debate. Pity. Well, let me tell you about here in Canada, where gun laws and carry laws are rigoriously enforced. Guess what? Our crime rate is skyrocketing. All those fancy laws that are meant to keep guns out of criminal hands don't work. They used to, sure, but now we're having crime shoot right back up as criminals figure out the basic fact that if guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
DE
Originally posted by Clipper
The fact that violent crime might be rising in Canada, does not mean the answer is to arm the entire population or that the reason for that rise is that the people are not armed. If you have school bullies picking on other kids, is the answer to give every child a catapult? And yes, unfortunately the vast majority of violence involves men, so an element of sexuality and and gender is a factor. Boys with their big toys is about insecure men feeling they have to prove their manhood, typically poorly educated men who feel inadequate.