ATS Street View 05: Gun Control and Jared Loughner, page 8

reply to post by shrike73

---

As gun deaths decline in New York City, killings involving knives increase

The city had 125 stabbing or slashing deaths last year. In 2007, there were 83. More people still died because of guns, even though that number declined. In 2008, 292 people were shot to death in New York. That's down from 347 the year before. Overall, homicides rose slightly. There were 523 last year, up from 496 in 2007.
SOURCEl

Guns are banned in NYC... yet people are getting killed by guns AND knives...?

So much for gun bans.

I suppose the only real reason people would go anti-gun is because its "theoretically" practical. To put it simply... people feel safe when the only the things that have a significantly higher death rate from things like drugs, cars, and drownings from swimming pools.

reply to post by detachedindividual

---

You can own guns in the U.K, they are not illegal. Handguns are but shotguns and rifles aren't. My mate has a gun licence and owns a shotgun but lives in the inner-city. If you want a gun, get a licence, it's not hard. I think it's a good thing that handguns are banned in the U.K. but each to their own.
That said, if I lived in the U.S I would buy a gun A.S.A.P. It seems like every nutter has one.

reply to post by doubleplusungood

---

If you lived in the US you would know the absurdity of that statement...

No offense sir. But this notion that America is some how a mad max violent place to live is ridiculous. And the idea that it has anything to do with lax guns laws flies in the face of facts, figures, numbers, and common sense.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Howtosurvive2012

---

None of my weapons are registered and none EVER WILL BE.
I'm not a criminal and I don't think government needs to know what type of weapons I have or how many.

10 years for an unregistered gun.. Give me a break.

. Non negotiable.

edit on 20-1-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

Here is the misconception, when you buy a firearm from a store, the run a background check, the firearm is not registered. The only time a firearm is registered is when you live in a state that requires it.
Having said that, I will never live in those states.

Originally posted by doubleplusungood
reply to post by detachedindividual

---

You can own guns in the U.K, they are not illegal. Handguns are but shotguns and rifles aren't. My mate has a gun licence and owns a shotgun but lives in the inner-city. If you want a gun, get a licence, it's not hard. I think it's a good thing that handguns are banned in the U.K. but each to their own.
That said, if I lived in the U.S I would buy a gun A.S.A.P. It seems like every nutter has one.

So when I go to the UK, I wont need my guns because everyone is running around like Monty Python, biscuits and tea is at noon, everyone is polite and wears hats, rounds glasses and carries an umbrella?
Sucks to be stereotyped huh?

reply to post by RustyShakleford92

---

I don't think Pakistan is a great place to use as an example. While they have a much more avid gun culture than the US. The Swiss have an established gun culture as well AND they aren't suffering from extremism.

reply to post by YouSir

---

Are all those dots in your post bullet holes? Do you have a fully auto "." gun?

---------------

On a serious note, the day there's no crime, war, or oppressive government regimes. The day there are no douche bags seeking control over me, is the day I will give up my guns...And even then I may bury a few....Just in case.......

reply to post by projectvxn

---

Yea, I know about the Swiss of course. But in Pakistan you can almost carry a fully automatic assault rifle or battle rifle wherever you want (few exceptions). I know they are a radical country, BUT it is a great example of showing people.... LOOK! these people are carrying around full automatic weapons everywhere! Why is nobody robbing banks....etc...? The people in this country are alot poorer than the average american, so you would think there would be more crime, but no.

reply to post by RustyShakleford92

---

Intriguing. I'd like to see the source. That way, I have some proof that guns aren't and will never be the issue. Plus if I said that, I know of some who would simply say whoo-haaa if I ever said something like that without stating my proof.

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by doubleplusungood
reply to post by detachedindividual

---

You can own guns in the U.K, they are not illegal. Handguns are but shotguns and rifles aren't. My mate has a gun licence and owns a shotgun but lives in the inner-city. If you want a gun, get a licence, it's not hard. I think it's a good thing that handguns are banned in the U.K. but each to their own.
That said, if I lived in the U.S I would buy a gun A.S.A.P. It seems like every nutter has one.

So when I go to the UK, I wont need my guns because everyone is running around like Monty Python, biscuits and tea is at noon, everyone is polite and wears hats, rounds glasses and carries an umbrella?
Sucks to be stereotyped huh?

Don't forget the double-decker busses! The UK is overrun with them - I know so, I see 'em in all the movies!

reply to post by projectvxn

---

That's the kind of traditional thinking that set OJ free, and allowed this guy to purchase legally.
I also own a ton. Where I live, registration of a second hand sale doesn't require registration. So I don't.
But if you ever lived in a place like NYC, you'd see why anything short of amendment infringement won't work.
I'm sure you didn't mean it, but it sounded like you support the illegal sale of a fire-arms to minors?
They cant drive, drink, or watch rated R movies, but you think they should be able to support a weapon?
That may've been reasonable when the constitution was written, but if you believe that works in a modern urban society, you may want to reevaluate your stance. Children, convicted felons, mentally ill, by constitutional rights, are all entitled to carry a deadly weapon. But the screening process is supposed to block that sale.

If you want to talk constitutional law, they should all be allowed to carry.
Is that what you really believe?

Originally posted by Howtosurvive2012
reply to post by projectvxn

---

That's the kind of traditional thinking that set OJ free, and allowed this guy to purchase legally.
I also own a ton. Where I live, registration of a second hand sale doesn't require registration. So I don't.
But if you ever lived in a place like NYC, you'd see why anything short of amendment infringement won't work.
I'm sure you didn't mean it, but it sounded like you support the illegal sale of a fire-arms to minors?
They cant drive, drink, or watch rated R movies, but you think they should be able to support a weapon?
That may've been reasonable when the constitution was written, but if you believe that works in a modern urban society, you may want to reevaluate your stance. Children, convicted felons, mentally ill, by constitutional rights, are all entitled to carry a deadly weapon. But the screening process is supposed to block that sale.

If you want to talk constitutional law, they should all be allowed to carry.
Is that what you really believe?

I can't speak for anyone else, but it's what I believe. If I start regulating and truncating the rights of others, how long before they can do the same to me?

Nutters with guns won't last long. They'll get taken out of the gene pool.

Convicted felons? Sure. If they can't be trusted to carry, why the hell let them back out with the rest of us to begin with? If you can't trust 'em, you can't trust 'em - for ANYTHING. Leave 'em locked up away from us then, or X 'em out, but don't give 'em additional "restrictions" and turn them loose on the general populace. THAT amounts to a life sentence as a non-person. Hell with that. If they've paid their debt to Society, they're done. Either make FREE men out of 'em, or leave 'em in the cell to rot. Don't give them "status" as some in-between half-person.

Kids? Why not? I know some kids who are a damn sight more responsible than some adults. It's all in the training. Not my problem if other folks don't want to be bothered training their own kids. I've OWNED my own firearms every minute of every day since I was 8 years old, and have never shot anyone who didn't desperately need it. My son, on the other hand, is a teenager now, and by these new screwy laws can't "own" a weapon of his own. No matter. You can bet your ass he's got access to one regardless of "ownership". He's been trained, and is ACUTELY aware of the destructive potential, and the lasting ramifications of it's use. He doesn't take it lightly, and I'm willing to bet he'll never be a victim of anyone who does.

It's all in the training. IF you have kids, either train 'em right, or EXPECT them to get culled out. Either way, it's not my problem, I've trained mine.

Why should the responsible be penalized for the acts of the irresponsible?

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: