It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When was the last time you heard/saw on the local news where a legal law biding citizen carrying a concealed firearm robbed the liqueur store down the street?
Originally posted by GammaRayBurst
Where's the link to the video?
"While some of your points are valid, there are many self defense mechanisms which incapacitate just as effectively as guns without killing or maiming. In fact, due to the accuracy required with a gun to incapacitate anyone determined to do you harm - especially if they also have a gun - something like a stun-gun which can incapacitate someone regardless of where you hit them with it is often a much safer defensive weapon, provided that they are set to a sufficient level to knock even the beefiest of assailants out."
"Guns, for being effective at a considerable distance from the body, are by definition offensive, not defensive."
"when guns and bullets are readily available (society ticking over) hunting often represents either a cruel elitist "sport" or an unwarranted threat to native species (although I must admit that I did thoroughly support their use in wiping out invasive species such as goats on Isabella, in the Galapagos)"
"When the situation arises that society is not functioning normally, and domesticated animals aren't a more readily available meal for people to walk up to and kill by more direct means, placing a greater value on each life taken, then the explosive powders used to fire guns are unlikely to be readily available for any significant period of time, and so hunting will eventually have to resort to more traditional methods. "
So either guns are unnecessary, or they won't last.
The reason that I define guns as offensive weapons is that, within the distances that use of a weapon (in a hypothetical and sadly absent gunless society, note) could be considered self defense, there are a great many weapons that could be used with much greater accuracy and safe.
And yes, the goats bit was (more than a bit) hypocritical - hence "I must admit..."
I sense some rational.
Originally posted by TheWill
reply to post by SnakeShot
Yes, I have done recreational shooting.
More accurate at close range? Everything - knives, tazers, hockey sticks, baseball bats, golf clubs, scissors... the list goes on A gun has a kick which none of these do, and when you're panicking and someone's coming at you, that's going to throw your aim off. Over a long distance (beyond the reach of the afore-mentioned), it is only truly defensive if they have a similar projectile weapon.
I sense some rational.
What is the meaning of this sentence? You sense some rational what, exactly?
edit on 7/1/2011 by TheWill because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by hawkiye
Guns in society save more lives then they take that is the true fact and they protect society from those who ignore the norms of society and would trample it rob you and kill you.
U.S. Leads Richest Nations In Gun Deaths
BY CHELSEA J. CARTER THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
ATLANTA -- The United States has by far the highest rate of gun deaths -- murders, suicides and accidents -- among the world's 36 richest nations, a government study found.
The U.S. rate for gun deaths in 1994 was 14.24 per 100,000 people. Japan had the lowest rate, at .05 per 100,000.
The study, done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is the first comprehensive international look at gun-related deaths. It was published Thursday in the International Journal of Epidemiology.
The CDC would not speculate why the death rates varied, but other researchers said easy access to guns and society's acceptance of violence are part of the problem in the United States.
``If you have a country saturated with guns -- available to people when they are intoxicated, angry or depressed -- it's not unusual guns will be used more often,'' said Rebecca Peters, a Johns Hopkins University fellow specializing in gun violence. ``This has to be treated as a public health emergency.''
The National Rifle Association called the study shoddy because it failed to examine all causes of violent deaths.
``What this shows is the CDC is after guns. They aren't concerned with violence. It's pretending that no homicide exists unless it's related to guns,'' said Paul Blackman, a research coordinator for the NRA in Fairfax, Va.
The 36 countries chosen were listed as the richest in the World Bank's 1994 World Development Report, with the highest GNP per capita income.
The study used 1994 statistics supplied by the 36 countries. Of the 88,649 gun deaths reported by all the countries, the United States accounted for 45 percent, said Etienne Krug, a CDC researcher and co-author of the article.
Japan, where very few people own guns, averages 124 gun-related attacks a year, and less than 1 percent end in death. Police often raid the homes of those suspected of having weapons.
The study found that gun-related deaths were five to six times higher in the Americas than in Europe or Australia and New Zealand and 95 times higher than in Asia.
Here are gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in the world's 36 richest countries in 1994: United States 14.24; Brazil 12.95; Mexico 12.69; Estonia 12.26; Argentina 8.93; Northern Ireland 6.63; Finland 6.46; Switzerland 5.31; France 5.15; Canada 4.31; Norway 3.82; Austria 3.70; Portugal 3.20; Israel 2.91; Belgium 2.90; Australia 2.65; Slovenia 2.60; Italy 2.44; New Zealand 2.38; Denmark 2.09; Sweden 1.92; Kuwait 1.84; Greece 1.29; Germany 1.24; Hungary 1.11; Republic of Ireland 0.97; Spain 0.78; Netherlands 0.70; Scotland 0.54; England and Wales 0.41; Taiwan 0.37; Singapore 0.21; Mauritius 0.19; Hong Kong 0.14; South Korea 0.12; Japan 0.05.
"The United States leads the industrialized world in level of gun-related deaths."
Originally posted by SnakeShot
Motor vehicle deaths in Mississippi, 2007, was 31.6 per 100,000.
Thats 2x more than guns.
To be fair, MA had the lowest with 6.7.
This doesn't mean everyone should stop driving.... or maybe the people in MS should since thats twice as many deaths
By my calculation, assuming the figures in the above post are correct, aproximately 40,000 die per hear from guns in the US? If I recall correctly, about that many die from the flu each year as well.
I would like to know what comparison the death rate is for knives, bats, assaults in general, in these other countries.
Check out the "gun control" genocide chart here and tell me if your better off being in an unarmed society-
Originally posted by XLR8R
reply to post by SpaDe_
Well there are states with "Familly Fun Centers" as they are called that kids can actualy shoot guns....how grand. Lets rejoys in human kind and it's stupidity.
Originally posted by SnakeShot
Yes most gun deaths are from deliberate actions, but we're talking statistics, and your talking about overall ban, so I think its completely relevant.
And yes, there isn't a genocide here "at the moment", and hopefully never.
Never again is a better possibility as long as we have our gun rights.