Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Time to take the gun from the American public!

page: 52
47
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


If that happens Im shooting and not asking questions.

Im all hell bent about the government stealing my money and children, why would I ask any questions?

I am broke, have no future or job even though Im very talented I have been cut off. No more questions. I wish this would start sooner than later honestly. Im tired of the games.




posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
Of course we still have gun related crime - just not to the levels you do in the USA.
8775 gun related crimes in the USA in one year compared to 43 in the UK gives testament to that.

If guns were more easily available then they would be used more often, pretty simple really.

Maybe but in the US we have another issue that comes into play. People seem to forget the States are separate sovereigns from the Federal Government. In the UK the use of a gun is illegal regardless of the situation right? If so we could argue that every single gun related issue in the UK is crime (absent law enforcement). In the US not every single gun related incident is criminal.

So would it be safe to argue that in the US our gun related deaths cover legal as well as illegal use where as in the UK all issues relating to guns are criminal (aside from police)?

How many of those 8775 gun related crimes that occurred in the US were for self defense? Defense of others?

The stats in the US will be high because of how we classify the crime. Anytime an individuals life is taken, either by police, a person defending themselves or others as well as those sentenced under capital punishment - it is a homicide. From that point the options are justified, non justified or court order. If we limit to just death by gun we would need to filter out justified shootings in order to get the accurate number.



Originally posted by Freeborn
Don't know about that.
Seems to me that far too many people take any sort of criticism of anything American automatically as a sign that a person is overtly anti-American.

I wouldn't say all are completely anti American.. I would say perception of the 2nd is skewed though by a majority simply based on the lack of understanding of the how and the why and by whom.



Originally posted by Freeborn
I have repeatedly stated that I firmly believe that The Right To Bear Arms as defined in The Second Amendment is really a matter for Americans and Americans only.

It's just not needed and probably more importantly not wanted in most other countries.
Different countries, different cultures, different requirements.

We will need to agree to disagree on the needed part so no worries there. As far as other countries go that an internal issue with their own reasons so again no argument from me on that.

Again though only criminals break the law. Gun control laws apply to law abiding citizens, not criminals. Collecting every single gun does not end the presence as criminals will find a way of getting one, as they do in the UK.


Originally posted by Freeborn
And to be honest we get a bit sick of American posters butting into at all sorts of threads saying that this or that wouldn't happen if we had The Right To Bear Arms.
Well guess what - it would and it does.

Please let us do things our way whilst you do things your way.

As opposed to non American posters butting into all sorts of threads taking the US to task and arguing the 2nd amendment is not needed or warranted?

ok....



Originally posted by Freeborn
ETA.

What, you think no-one criticises governments here in the UK and continental Europe?

edit on 9/4/12 by Freeborn because: Add ETA


Of course not, and you would know that had you read the entire 3rd paragraph instead of just citing a portion of it, taking it out of context.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 05:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




How many of those 8775 gun related crimes that occurred in the US were for self defense? Defense of others?


Is self-defence a crime in the USA?

I've seen many a post here on ATS where people assure me that if someone breaks in to your property or tries to assualt you etc then you are fully entitled to use your firearm to protect yourself.
If that's so then surely such instances wouldn't be included in crime figures because by definition a crime is something that is against the law.
'Justified shootings' won't be included in crime figures.

Hope I've explained myself there.

Doesn't matter which way anyone tries to spin it the figures show that gun crime is proportionally far higher in the USA than it is in the UK.



Collecting every single gun does not end the presence as criminals will find a way of getting one, as they do in the UK.


Yes, I understand that, but remarkably few criminals in the UK use guns.
The few that do tend to use them in crimes against each other.
Any gun related crimes committed against law abiding citizens tend to become extremely high profile and those convicted of such crimes tend to be treat relatively severely.



As opposed to non American posters butting into all sorts of threads taking the US to task and arguing the 2nd amendment is not needed or warranted?

ok....


Not at all, I'm sure they can be equally as pedantic, moralistic and patronising etc.

I just notice American posters popping up in completely unrelated threads stating that this wouldn't happen or that wouldn't happen if we had The Right To Bear Arms.
First of all, it would and it does and secondly it totally irrelevant.

Whilst there are many similarities between our nations and cultures etc there are also many differences.
Sometimes what is right for you is not right for us.
Sometimes what you want we don't want.
And vice versa.
I really don't see what's so hard about it all.

Please keep your Second Amendment if that's what you want - I certainly would never suggest that you should get rid of it - it's entirely up to you.
But by the same token stop trying to tell us what to do - we don't need it and we don't want it.

Far too many people wish and seek to impose their own morals and beliefs upon other people in this world.
Unfortunately that doesn't just apply to gun control etc but includes religion, politics and almost every aspect of life.

We all need to live and let live a bit more and stop being so concerend about what other people are doing.

Anyway, I'm out of this thread - one can only say the same thing so many times.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
Is self-defence a crime in the USA?

I've seen many a post here on ATS where people assure me that if someone breaks in to your property or tries to assualt you etc then you are fully entitled to use your firearm to protect yourself.

Actually it depends. The ability for a civilian to use deadly force varies from state to state. Some states allow deadly force to be used the moment someone breaks into your house. Other states require the victim to disengage and leave the area if they can safely do so.


Originally posted by Freeborn
If that's so then surely such instances wouldn't be included in crime figures because by definition a crime is something that is against the law.
'Justified shootings' won't be included in crime figures.


Hope I've explained myself there.
Actually they will.. Anytime a person is killed it is a crime - its a homicide. The circumstances surrounding the shooting is whats looked at. The person who defended themselves with deadly force still committed a homicide, and as I stated before it is listed as such. It will then be either justified, not justified or court ordered (Utah still uses the firing squad for death row if the persons so chooses (I think its going away - depends on their death row rules).


Originally posted by Freeborn
Doesn't matter which way anyone tries to spin it the figures show that gun crime is proportionally far higher in the USA than it is in the UK.

Actually it does matter because the stats are made up of State as well as Federal statistics. It also matters because of justified verse non justified. Its not something that can just be ignored. As for the higher stats in the US that happens when you compare a nation of 313 million to one of almost 62 million.




Originally posted by Freeborn
Yes, I understand that, but remarkably few criminals in the UK use guns.
The few that do tend to use them in crimes against each other.
Any gun related crimes committed against law abiding citizens tend to become extremely high profile and those convicted of such crimes tend to be treat relatively severely.

Yet the fact remains that even with strict gun control laws, criminals still obtain them and use them, regardless of what the consequences are. They are also used against law abiding citizens. I find it difficult to accept that gun crimes in the UK are all criminal on criminal.



Originally posted by Freeborn
Not at all, I'm sure they can be equally as pedantic, moralistic and patronising etc.

I just notice American posters popping up in completely unrelated threads stating that this wouldn't happen or that wouldn't happen if we had The Right To Bear Arms.
First of all, it would and it does and secondly it totally irrelevant.

If its something you never had then how can one dismiss the argument so quickly? Its no different than coming into this thread and arguing criminal stats would be a lot lower if we got rid of guns.




Originally posted by Freeborn
Whilst there are many similarities between our nations and cultures etc there are also many differences.
Sometimes what is right for you is not right for us.
Sometimes what you want we don't want.
And vice versa.
I really don't see what's so hard about it all.

I have not advocated for gun rights to be restored in the UK.



Originally posted by Freeborn
Please keep your Second Amendment if that's what you want - I certainly would never suggest that you should get rid of it - it's entirely up to you.
But by the same token stop trying to tell us what to do - we don't need it and we don't want it.

We didn't tell anyone what to do. Those Americans who posted in the threads you refer to are no different than people who are from countries who do not have the right to own / possess a gun telling us the 2nd amendment is not needed.

I will agree that opinions can be taken as anything but when the facts used are incorrect. Did you not suggest the 2nd amendment is not needed?



Originally posted by Freeborn
Far too many people wish and seek to impose their own morals and beliefs upon other people in this world.
Unfortunately that doesn't just apply to gun control etc but includes religion, politics and almost every aspect of life.

Yeah that double standard has been around since the dawn of time.


Originally posted by Freeborn
We all need to live and let live a bit more and stop being so concerend about what other people are doing.

I disagree on this point. That comment, concerned about others, is a double edged sword and is along the same lines of how people view the 2nd amendment while not completely understanding it or its roll in our history.

Does Switzerland face the same issues the US does when it comes to terrorism?
I have not seen any threats made against Switzerland yet I see a bunch made about the US. The US must take those threats as legitimate until proven otherwise.

Like your comment on the second - some positions are good for countries and that same position may not work for others.



Originally posted by Freeborn
Anyway, I'm out of this thread - one can only say the same thing so many times.

or ignore it...
edit on 11-4-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Sometimes against my better judgement I just can't help myself......



As for the higher stats in the US that happens when you compare a nation of 313 million to one of almost 62 million.


Of course, I was talking about pro-rata.

The USA has a population approximately five times that of the UK.
Even accounting for population and statistical variances 8775 is proportionally far higher than 43.
No amount of spin or statistical manipulation can alter that.



Yet the fact remains that even with strict gun control laws, criminals still obtain them and use them, regardless of what the consequences are. They are also used against law abiding citizens. I find it difficult to accept that gun crimes in the UK are all criminal on criminal.


I've never denied that criminals still get hold of them, it's just not as common as it is The States.

Why is that?

I'll let you make your own mind up on that - I have my own opinions based on living here all my life, (I am however quite widely travelled) and being more than just a little 'acquainted' with certain elements on the fringes and outside of mainstream society etc.

And of course all gun crime isn't all criminal on criminal, just the vast majority of it.
And when it isn't criminal upon criminal then it tends to very high profile indeed.



If its something you never had then how can one dismiss the argument so quickly?


I've never dismissed the arguement quickly, I've given it much thought and that is the considered opinion I have come up with given my life experiences of this country and it's people.



Its no different than coming into this thread and arguing criminal stats would be a lot lower if we got rid of guns.


I've never said gun related crime in the US would go down if the Second Amendment was repealed, please show me where I have done so.

I have said gun crime would go up in the UK if our gun control laws were relaxed.

That has nothing to do with the USA and what happens there.

I have repeatedly stated that Americans have a completely different mind set and pysche when it comes to firearms.
You do things your way and what's right for you, as it should be.
And so do we.



I have not advocated for gun rights to be restored in the UK.


Not you personally, but it is an opinion expressed quite frequently by other US posters even when it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever on the topic under discussion.



Those Americans who posted in the threads you refer to are no different than people who are from countries who do not have the right to own / possess a gun telling us the 2nd amendment is not needed.


I agree with you entirely on that.

I think it's reasonable on a site like this to express a considered and reasoned opinion, unfortunately sometimes that can come across as dictatorial etc.

I guess we've all been guilty of it on occassion.



I will agree that opinions can be taken as anything but when the facts used are incorrect. Did you not suggest the 2nd amendment is not needed?


Err....I don't think I've ever said that, please show me where I did.

I understand fully why you have it and why you want to keep it.

I have said that we in the UK, and probably the vast majority of continental Europe and Australia etc, neither need or want anything similar to your Second Amendment - quite a different thing altogether.



Yeah that double standard has been around since the dawn of time.


Yeah, unfortunately so.



I disagree on this point. That comment, concerned about others, is a double edged sword and is along the same lines of how people view the 2nd amendment while not completely understanding it or its roll in our history.


Oh, I understand the Second Amendment and it's place in your history.
And I respect that.

But it has no relevance on UK society, history and culture which is quite different.



Does Switzerland face the same issues the US does when it comes to terrorism?
I have not seen any threats made against Switzerland yet I see a bunch made about the US. The US must take those threats as legitimate until proven otherwise.


Sorry, I don't quite follow you here, maybe it's me being a bit thick headed?
What has terrorism or the threat of terrorism have to do with this thread unless you mean the Right To Bear Arms is a deterrent or defence against it?

Or maybe because of the gun laws in Switzerland?



Like your comment on the second - some positions are good for countries and that same position may not work for others.


Too true.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


I apparently took your posts the wrong way so my apologies. I also misquoted / interpreted some of your responses incorrectly so again my apologies. The not needed was referencing other countries. It was not my intention to do that.

There are people who argue the US does not need the second amendment / guns. Often they compare the US to other countries to support the position of no guns, often comparing stats from one area or the other.

My point on the Switzerland - terrorism comment was to demonstrate how a comparison looks valid to one person and invalid to another. Their view is based on the top layer / high visibility generic comparison while ignoring underlying issues / circumstances. Yes, on the surface the US and Switzerland are both countries, however they are viewed very differently due to internal / domestic issues.

It would be like making the argument that the US should get rid of its military because the country of The Federated States of Micronesia has no need for one. That argument ignores the underlying issue in that the US is most likely going to be a target where as The Federated States of Micronesia will not.

I'm not saying terrorism is being used as an excuse for us to keep our guns. Now that I got this far I am realizing we are saying the same thing on what works for one country and not the other.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Sorry, but did Scandinavia manage to keep swords out of the hands of criminals?


Nope. They were hewed down with some regularity when they misused their swords, and everyone else was armed likewise. I said "Scandanavia did fairly good at keeping the peace". No other country has ever managed to eradicate criminals, either, yours included, and I don't much care which country you claim - you will find criminals there, and most criminals will be armed. You are just quibbling over they type of arm at this point, not the presence or utter absence of one.

Scandanavia hasn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals, either. Several kids recently paid with their lives for the disarmament of the non-criminals, though. You see, the defenders are no longer allowed to be armed to parity there, and much to their detriment, the law-abiding apparently abide by the law, whereas the criminals feel no such compulsion to do so.





edit on 2012/4/11 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Again though only criminals break the law. Gun control laws apply to law abiding citizens, not criminals. Collecting every single gun does not end the presence as criminals will find a way of getting one, as they do in the UK.



in America, we could probably apply to Eric Holder to obtain weapons after a total gun ban. It has worked fairly well for the Mexican Drug Cartels...



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




How many of those 8775 gun related crimes that occurred in the US were for self defense? Defense of others?


Is self-defence a crime in the USA?

I've seen many a post here on ATS where people assure me that if someone breaks in to your property or tries to assualt you etc then you are fully entitled to use your firearm to protect yourself.
If that's so then surely such instances wouldn't be included in crime figures because by definition a crime is something that is against the law.
'Justified shootings' won't be included in crime figures.

Hope I've explained myself there.

Doesn't matter which way anyone tries to spin it the figures show that gun crime is proportionally far higher in the USA than it is in the UK.


They are included in the crime figures here not because the shooting was a crime, but because a firearm was used in the resolution of the crime, making it a "firearms related crime". It's counter-intuitive, but that's the way it works.



Whilst there are many similarities between our nations and cultures etc there are also many differences.
Sometimes what is right for you is not right for us.
Sometimes what you want we don't want.
And vice versa.
I really don't see what's so hard about it all.

Please keep your Second Amendment if that's what you want - I certainly would never suggest that you should get rid of it - it's entirely up to you.
But by the same token stop trying to tell us what to do - we don't need it and we don't want it.

Far too many people wish and seek to impose their own morals and beliefs upon other people in this world.
Unfortunately that doesn't just apply to gun control etc but includes religion, politics and almost every aspect of life.

We all need to live and let live a bit more and stop being so concerend about what other people are doing.



Therein lies the rub. There are many people who can't quite seem to grasp that simple fat, and I commend you for not being among them.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Many people from other countries do not, and can not, understand the true nature of violent crime in the United States. Most seem to feel that most Americans carry handguns when out in public, and that crime is evenly distrubuted across the entire continental US. Nothing could be further from the truth.

1) In low crime areas, most citizens seldom carry firearms into public places, or even in their vehicles.

2) Crime is almost always higher in areas with highly restrictive gun laws, or even outright bans.

Perhaps the two experiences I faced many years ago, might shed some light on the very real issues concerning gun control restrictions, and the need for personal protection in high crime areas of the US.

1) I was once accosted by three thugs in Chicago, where firearms were actually banned at the time. One had a hunting knife, another had a bayonet, and the third claimed he had a handgun in his jacket pocket, and that it was pointed at me. I felt my life was in danger and, instead of my wallet, I pulled a locked and loaded Smith and Wesson Model 39 (9mm) from my rear pocket. As they took off running, the bayonet was dropped, and one of them had the audacity to shout "Man, that's illegal". That was approximately 30 years ago. I still have the 18" Italian issue bayonet as a trophy. That one decision likely saved my life, and it did, indeed, deter at least 1 crime.

In that instance, does anyone really feel that I would have been better off without a firearm?

2) When I lived North of Chicago, in a town named Zion (also with conceal and carry bans), I very rarely carried a firearm because it was illegal. I was assaulted by two individuals while walking home from a friends house one night. I was struck on the upper portion of my leg with an approximately 1" dia. solid metal rod. That blow broke my femur (thigh bone) and I immediately went down and couldn't get back up. They then proceeded to kick me in the head and face with their boots. That rendered me unconscious, broke my nose, and when I finally came to, I spit most of my forward teeth out.

Being recently divorced, I was living by myself in an apartment that was part of a duplex, with the other half being unoccupied. The next morning, after the surgery to repair my fractured leg, I was visited by 2 detectives sent to investigate my assault. At that time they also informed me that my apartment had also been burglarized and ransacked.

In addition to my firearms, that were well hidden, and few knew about, all of my guitars, amps, stereo equipment, basically everything but furniture and clothes were stolen. The detectives figured they made several trips, so whoever did it likely knew I wasn't coming home that night. In all probability, the one's that assaulted me got my address from my stolen wallet, then burglarized my home after they saw my broken body carried off by the ambulance.

When I was finally able to travel, I packed up what few possessions I had left, got in the car and traveled about 700 miles to where I am now. I have lived on the very Eastern end of Tennessee for over 25 yrs. Many people in this area own and carry firearms, I have never had even a threat here. Because of that, I still don't feel a need to carry a weapon of my own.

I still feel very, very bad about the two rifles, one shotgun, and one handgun that I did own ending up in the hands of criminals. Even so, if I had disobeyed the gun control laws that one night, and carried that 9mm with me, that whole ordeal WOULD HAVE BEEN AVERTED, and I can promise that I wouldn't have even needed to fire it. Most criminals are cowards, and will run when they don't have an advantage.

The only thing not typical about incidents such as those in high crime areas, is the fact that I survived the second one.

My conclusion:
I will NEVER, and I repeat NEVER, go into the Chicago area, or any other high crime area, again without a fully locked and loaded semi automatic handgun! And, I honestly don't give a damn if it's legal or not.

See ya,
Milt
edit on 11-4-2012 by BenReclused because: Typo



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Another interesting dilemma they will face is the constitution itself. On the off chance the 2nd amendment is repealed and we adopt the UN laws (hypothetical) I dont see how the guns can be collected / confiscated.

2nd is repealed, making gun ownership illegal for civilians. Law Enforcement can't just collect the guns as that would have 4th amendment implications. It would also run smack dab into ex post facto issues.

A law cannot be retroactive meaning the gun owners cannot be punished for being in possession of a gun.


Which is why the debate is really pointless, a ban will never happen in America.

I get those E-Mails all the time spouting about Obama taking guns and ammunition away using some underhanded legal tomfoolery, and they are all bunk.

I'm convinced it's the gun industry spreading the rumors. Because the last thing the true liberals wanted to see was a 40% jump in gun sales.

It's starting to tick me off because Ammo has been hard to come by at times over the last 3 years, so when I find it in stock I usually buy multiple boxes. So it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy because the other guys who get the E-Mails show up and find empty ammo shelves too, so they start hoarding too.

Thankfully I completed my ammo stash before 2008, but I don't want to dip into it for practice so I'm stuck buying when it available/



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 


LOL.

You're just living in a fantasy inspired by a very very small sample-set.

Guess what city is in the top ten, safety wise in the US: New York.

The others:

Boston
Columbus, Ohio
Louisville, KY
Minneapolis, Minn
Portland, Ore
San Francisco
Seattle
Tampa, Fla
Virginia Beach, Va.

Now that includes all things related to injuries, not just crime.

For Just crime, go here:

www.morganquitno.com...

What do you see?

Look at the parts of America with the most crime, and the least.

Any correlation between gun laws and crime?

Go, have a look.

If that's too much work, look here:



Studies show that gun ownership rates affect gun deaths. States where a higher percentage of households have guns have higher rates of homicide and suicide than states where fewer households have guns.ii In addition, a report published by Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that states with higher rates of “crime gun exports” — where a firearm sold by a dealer in one state is later found at a crime scene in a different state — have higher rates of gun murders than states with lower rates of crime gun exports.iii That report also found a “strong association” between state crime gun export rates and the existence of laws regulating guns.iv For example, the average crime gun export rate of states that do not require the reporting of lost or stolen firearms is three times the average rate of states that do require reporting.v

In addition to these studies, our ranking reveals that many of the states with the strongest gun laws also have the lowest gun death rates. Conversely, many states with the weakest gun laws have the highest gun death rates. Although it is beyond the scope of this publication to demonstrate a causal relationship between state gun laws and gun death rates, the data provides support for the argument that gun laws are a significant factor in a state’s rate of gun deaths.vi More research is needed to determine the precise relationship between state gun laws and gun death rates.


You can read the whole report and check all the data here:

www.lcav.org...

So by moving somewhere with weaker gun laws you actually INCREASED your chances of being a victim of gun related crime... but there's the rub.... the safest city in one state, no matter the laws, may be a LOT safer than the most dangerous city in another... you'd probably have been safest in a safe neighbourhood in a state with tighter gun control laws... or so say all the statistics...



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


If the government ever gives me the chance to come and take away all the guns from you &^%& kicking red necks & gangsters, I will be on the front line. Challenge accepted!



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


The place where crime happens most is the poor areas. the areas tourists don't go, unless lost. Sure you can be perfectly safe in NYC if you stick to Manhattan. Get lost and end up in say BX at night, not very safe indeed.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Okay, I'm gonna try asking one more time.

Why are all of you - yes, ALL OF YOU - on both sides of this so obsessed with GUNS? Come on, really.. why?

In the 50+ plus years I've lived all over the US, I have never personally known of a single person killed with a gun. Traffic accidents, getting run over by a car while bicycling, drowning, falling, stabbed to death (my neighbor at one place killed his girlfriend and her son then set the house on fire, but he used a KNIFE), strokes, etc. etc.

Yes, I see them in the news all the time because that's what the news covers, but I've never personally known of one single person killed by a gun, either on purpose or accidentally.

I'm paying for mobile broadband by the MB right now so I can't go look up stuff, but I'll bet if you looked at total deaths (from all causes), deaths by firearm would be less than 5%, if that. Even if you pulled all illnesses and "natural causes" out of the stats, I still bet it would be a very low percentage.

So again, why are we so obsessed with/focused on GUNS? Because the MSM is, and there is an agenda behind that. Geez, people, you're on ATS. Haven't you learned yet that what you get in the news is skewed information, it's just what they want you to think about and know?

If we could somehow magically remove all guns from the world, completely, do you really think it would make any difference? I don't. We managed to kill each other off in large numbers before we invented guns, and if the guns were somehow gone we'd just switch to other methods.

The guns are not the problem, the people who use them are.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Not true.

Look at Chicago and D.C., the violent crime rate is way way above the national average, very strict gun laws.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Guess what city is in the top ten, safety wise in the US: New York.

The others:

Boston
Columbus, Ohio
Louisville, KY
Minneapolis, Minn
Portland, Ore
San Francisco
Seattle
Tampa, Fla
Virginia Beach, Va.

Now that includes all things related to injuries, not just crime.

For Just crime, go here:

www.morganquitno.com...

What do you see?

Well... I see that you have lied once again!

The following DID NOT make the top 25 safest cities surveyed:
New York
San Francisco
Portland, Ore
Seattle

They only made the top 10 safest cities surveyed with a population of over 500,000. There were only 31 cities in that category, so that's not very significant.

The following actually appear in the "Most Dangerous" category:
Columbus, Ohio
Tampa, Fla.

The following are not even mentioned in your source:
Boston
Louisville, KY
Minneapolis, Minn
Virginia Beach, Va.

Guess what! I learned all of that from THE SOURCE YOU BASED THAT CLAIM ON!.

The article you link to has absolutely nothing to do with crime rates, or even homicide rates. It only regards firearm deaths. I'm sure you knew that though, so I reckon this also is only another of your attempts to deceive.


So by moving somewhere with weaker gun laws you actually INCREASED your chances of being a victim of gun related crime

That claim is no more than nonsense!

Chicago has a murder/non negligent homicide rate of 15.2 per 100,000, while the overall rate of Tennessee is only 5.6. When one considers that Memphis and Nashville are the greatest contributors to that rate, the murder/non negligent homicide rate of East Tennessee becomes negligible.

I reckon that makes my "fantasy" a reality!

So much for bursting your little bubble...

See ya,
Milt
edit on 12-4-2012 by BenReclused because: Typo



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by hhott
 


Because its easier to attack a law dealing with firearms than it is to attack a law dealing with how fast a person drives. Going aftetr traffic accidents would open the door and expose the same type of facts regardless of country.

the right to ear arms is a uniquely American invention that people who are not Americans have a difficult time understanding. Its a topic that political parties within the Us use against each other to attack policies and its a topic countries like to try and use against the US because of whatever trivial reason they have for doing it at the time.

The 2nd amendment is not going anywhere...
The Supreme Court ruled the 2nd amendment applies to the individual...
The UN...... well.... is the UN so enough about them...



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by hhott
 


In the 50+ plus years I've lived all over the US, I have never personally known of a single person killed with a gun.

In my 50+ years I've known 3 people killed by firearms.

Two were murder victims, killed in separate instances, when I lived in Zion, Ill. I have no doubt that if they had been armed, they would still be alive.

One was the death of my best friend when we were both 13. He died in a hunting accident in South Carolina. Unfortunately he did something I was taught to never do... lean a shotgun against a tree trunk without the barrel, at least, resting in a "nook".

I am not "obsessed" with firearms. I do not currently own any, nor am I currently interested in purchasing any.

I do however get quite annoyed by those in foreign lands, preaching down from their "high horses" when, in fact, they know absolutely nothing about the United States, it's laws, conditions here, or even it's citizens.

See ya,
Milt



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 


Yeah, milt, cause you know the problem with those killed was the situation had too few guns... not too many...






top topics



 
47
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join