Do Less Guns Really Mean Less Crime?

reply to post by vonclod


It seems people don't realize that the most dangerous cities in the USA, which drag down the countries statistics as a whole, are strict gun free zones. NYC and Chicago for example give an automatic jail sentence for having a gun in the city limits, even if it is a legally obtained firearm and you have a permit.

D.C, Chicago, Detroit, NYC, Philly, Baltimore etc are all gun free cities and are among the most violent in the nation.

Maxatoria
You need to factor in cultural views and attitudes as like here in the UK we have never been a gun worshipping culture compared with the USA

would shipping every person here in the UK a fully automatic 50cal with DU ammo suddenly stop crime...hell no..chavs+white lightening cider and never having to live with firearms would mean people would start to settle stupid arguments in a rather final way over something as daft as an argument over the height of a hedge etc

Lol we can't even own firepower like that in the US.... Fully automatic 50 cal! lol!!!

Do you people in the UK really think we are allowed such things?!

I mean you can buy a .50 long distance rifle... (usually used for buffalo hunting) but no fully automatic military style full auto Rambo style .50 cal...

Even the gun toting masses have agreed that owning something like that is not necessary..

raymundoko
reply to post by vonclod

 

It seems people don't realize that the most dangerous cities in the USA, which drag down the countries statistics as a whole, are strict gun free zones. NYC and Chicago for example give an automatic jail sentence for having a gun in the city limits, even if it is a legally obtained firearm and you have a permit.

D.C, Chicago, Detroit, NYC, Philly, Baltimore etc are all gun free cities and are among the most violent in the nation.

edit on 24-9-2013 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)

Thats because while you can legally purchase a gun there after going through all the loops, getting a concealed carry permit there is next to impossible. You have to prove extraordinary need such as owning a business that is frequently targeted, have people stalking you and making threats, be a high ranking ex law enforcement officer, etc.

People just dont carry there. They go target practicing and then lock their guns in a safe. Of course you can use it for home defense purposes if someone tries to burglarise you with a deadly weapon of there own.

Way too much BS in these liberal strongholds!

reply to post by raymundoko


I read an article not long ago (and i'm still looking for it) that said if we removed Chicago, Detroit, Washington DC and New Orleans we'd be 3rd from the bottom.

I'll keep looking for it...

reply to post by raymundoko


You can scratch Detroit off that list. We are an open carry state. I paid $200 for an eight hour class for my CPL (Concealed Pistol License). Took the certificate down to the state cops, paid my money, took my pic, filled out a small booklet with info and done. Easy peasy.

Problem is Detroit is over run with crime already. There is no helping this place. Baghdad was a step up

reply to post by Beavers


Saddam was elected, Hitler was elected; they WERE democratic societies before they were disarmed. That is the point.

You say I accept dead kids because I want guns, it kind of a shallow argument. It's like me saying you own a computer and child porn is predominantly trafficked via computer, ergo you support child porn.

The dead kids you keep tossing around as props (acting as if you care about them)? They were created when people like you disarmed the adults that should have protected them. Your laws you want passed will never disarm those with the ability to commit genocide. Why is that so hard to understand.

Gun laws DO NOT effect everyone, only the cattle. The ranchers get to keep their guns...........

Beavers
Yes, emotional, because dead people cause emotions and protecting my family from stupid people is more important to me than your dangerous hobby or need to feel like a man.

In the countries you speak of, children might get a black eye when they mess with the wrong crowd but they don't come home in a box after watching batman. This happens everyday all over the US... Focus on that statistic rather than the one I plucked out of thin air whilst making a point.

I bet you won't though, you just want guns and don't care about the dead kids that come with them

I can't honestly tell if you're being facetious or not.

You want to protect your family - but you don't want others to be able to do so? I say this because many of us carry a firearm for expressly that purpose. To protect our family.

In the U.S. most children continue to get just a black eye for messing with the wrong crowd. I know everyone has a love-hate relationship with statistics, but they pretty well prove that for the number of children we have and the number of schools we have, gun violence from one youth to another is pretty much nil. The area where this gets most skewed is in our unfortunately "ghetto" areas where youth gangs are much higher in concentration.

"you just want guns and don't care about the dead kids that come with them" - This one, I just can't wrap my head around. I've heard this argument from other anti-gunners several times, and it boggles my mind. Please elaborate to me where any of you somehow think that people maintaining the right to defend themselves, and the means to, somehow means we don't value our children's lives?

Are you a parent? You talk like you are one. Well, I'm a parent. And I carry a gun. Every day. Because I love my child so much that I would not give up any option to better protect her or myself.

So let's deal with some misconceptions:

Gun owners care more about their guns than anything else
While this may be true for a very small number of people, that's a huge generalization. It's right up there with saying all Muslims are terrorists. All Americans are fat and lazy. All Germans are Nazis. All British are pompous asses.

Any of that true? Of course not. Likewise very few gun owners care more about their firearms then the other aspects of their lives. They are, however, an integral part, and they care about it just like anything else in their lives, and when it's being constantly threatened by ignorance, they react strongly about it.

Getting rid of guns will lower crime:
I have yet to find any evidence that shows this has worked in any other country. Oh, people will say that gun crime is down, and sure - it does go down, while violent crime increases across the board greatly in every other category. In America, certainly, this is provable and true. We have states like Hawaii and Illinois as a good example. In terms of just a city, Chicago, Illinois. Crime rate there is appalling, especially violent crime. Barely anyone is allowed to have a firearm.

Whereas states like Michigan, which earlier this year or late last year saw a 220,000 conceal carry license increase, has seen crime drop considerably. No one is playing a hero - bad guys just don't like risks, and knowing that every target may now be armed is a proven deterrent.

People carrying firearms just do it to be macho/feel like a man/show off:
Right off the bat, what does it mean for a woman who carries? There are plenty of them. Bet they feel like they got some balls yeah? *Eye roll* How about conceal carry? The vast majority of defensive carriers carry concealed. That means people can't see their firearm, in case you weren't sure. Since no one can see it, how are they doing it to show off or feel macho? Acting macho requires people to notice what it is you're being macho about. If you met me on any of the majority of days I conceal carry, you would never know. That's because I'm just a normal person, and I act like it.

No, some of you may not like it, but again: this argument is a fallacy. There probably are some who carry to feel like a macho man. But, at that point, it's just like the first point about generalizations.

See, the biggest and hardest part about gun control in America to me, is that aside from our Second Amendment, it really is just the volume of firearms in the country already. If every law abiding citizen gave up their firearms, it really -would- leave only the criminals with them. This isn't hyperbole. It's kind of like background checks - it won't accomplish anything because people who would fail a background check don't buy their guns at a store to begin with! There are a myriad of ways for them to procure them, and unfortunately for us good citizens, those have been in place a long time.

So me giving up my firearm just means I no longer have it as a defensive option when all other options, including running, have failed. Do yourselves a favor, go read up on people who carry firearms regularly. Not one of them says something like "Man, I can't wait for someone to try to attack me so I can shoot 'em!!" No, to probably 99% of us, it will be the worst day in our lives if we have to pull and actually shoot someone. The only reason we do it, is because it's STILL a better day than having to bury your child, or your spouse, or die yourself. All because you couldn't protect them from a criminal who had a gun, because they don't give a damn about your firearm laws to begin with.

And don't kid yourself. Calling the police and waiting for them to arrive just means someone will be there slightly sooner to put you in your bodybag.

reply to post by 200Plus


What a strange argument!! The computer wasn't invented purely for child porn and certainly isn't predominately used for that reason. (maybe in your household ) - the gun however WAS invented to kill people.

reply to post by UnmitigatedDisaster


if there are no guns, people can't be shot.

it's black and white.

more guns aren't going to make someone with a gun less likely to attack you, if they want to attack you and know, or assume you have a gun, they're just going to attack you from a distance!

you live in fear of someone attacking you, so you buy a gun. we hear about stories of people's children finding and using their guns in anger or accident all the time. This stuff isn't made up by crazy people like me that don't want to see people hurt, it happens because guns are legal and every retard has one.

There is a gun loaded laying on the table. There are two people sitting next to that table looking at the gun. The gun just lays there, it does nothing. Then all of the sudden BANG!

Who picked up the gun and fired it?

Neither one touch the gun or even attempted to. they hid under the table as protection because of some CRAZY person decided to shoot someone with their own gun out side the window next to the table where the gun was lying.

People are crying for gun control. People don't understand what gun control is....

Gun control is when you don't pick up your gun just to shoot or cause harm to others. Gun control is where you lock up your guns and only use them for hunting or for protection from others that don't know how to control their own guns.

The person who shot his gun outside the window was not defending himself. Maybe he was mad, upset from a bad drug deal gone wrong, looked at wrong, was talked to the wrong way. There are so many wrongs to list, I'm not going to waste my time.

In truth of things.... We need people control that use the gun(s) for all the wrong reasons.

So we take away all the guns. People will then make there own weapons (in the name of protection) to replace the gun and continue doing what the gun was NOT doing in the first place.

It's the people that are using the gun to kill. Normally they are sick minded, or criminal intent people. These are the people that need to be controlled, not the gun.

FYI: with all the schools as a no gun zone (USA), the schools don't understand that with even every day excepted school supplies, ANYONE can create a weapon to kill or hurt someone. That could be a pencil, pen, ruler, book, and so on.

Gun control is not the answer. We need people control, we need to start teaching them at a young age that picking up a gun to kill or harm someone is wrong.

reply to post by Beavers


So we've added reading comprehension to the growing list of our differences I see.

It's all good. I didn't really expect a serious reply on the topic at hand.

You are right and guns are evil demonic creatures that add to ones manhood while also randomly ending lives at every turn. You cannot be reasoned with because deep inside you yearn to be a victim. That's the only reason I can see for you to be so adamant about disarming others. You want company at the gallows.

Molon Labe

Beavers
reply to post by UnmitigatedDisaster

 

if there are no guns, people can't be shot.

it's black and white.

more guns aren't going to make someone with a gun less likely to attack you, if they want to attack you and know, or assume you have a gun, they're just going to attack you from a distance!

you live in fear of someone attacking you, so you buy a gun. we hear about stories of people's children finding and using their guns in anger or accident all the time. This stuff isn't made up by crazy people like me that don't want to see people hurt, it happens because guns are legal and every retard has one.

Yes, there are stories, they still are vastly small in number. Tragic, but small.

You are right, if people have no guns, people can't be shot. Except that assumes everybody will have none. That isn't the case. It isn't the case in any country that has banned firearms in some or many ways.

Hell, I have a buddy in Australia who he and I were recently discussing this very topic. He said that he feels much safer because of their gun control laws. Not three days later there was a shootout two doors down from him, with one person dead. His next comment to me, "Man I wish I had a gun!"

You labor under this impression that denying legal methods of ownership will somehow stop criminals from owning them. It is the giant, huge, unmistakable except to anti-gunners, flaw in this argument. Nothing you do will stop them from acquiring a firearm. Make it harder? Yeah. Reduce the number of them? Probably. But stop them? Nope. To be clear I am not accounting for paramilitary or military forces. Just regular everyday people.

It also gets argued as if it will somehow stop violent crime in general. "Get rid of guns and crime will stop!" Yeah. You keep telling yourself that buddy. Meanwhile I live in the real world where crime happens on a far greater scale without firearms then it does with. That rape? Didn't need a gun. Mugging? Most of the time didn't need it either. Random beat down, racially motivated or not? No gun. Politicians? They only need laws to steal from you

I hear violence existed before guns too.

Look - if you're only argument is that less guns would equal less shootings, then sure. You'd be technically correct. But it would only equal -less- shootings. Not none. And that is why you shouldn't take them away from law abiding citizens.

Unless you're making the blanket assumption that everyone with a gun is also a criminal murderer waiting to be?

Ok, I've had enough of trying to reason with your emotional intelligence and it is time for some facts.

Here's a report on the average number of deaths from Firearms per 100,000 people, per year in the US.

statistic facts

The highest murder rate per 100,000 people was 12 people in 1 year dying from firearms (Columbia), which was DOWN 3% from the previous years. If we take DC as an example (10.16 firearm murders per 100k people) and include assaults with firearms for DC too @246.52 per 100k we're looking at around 356 violent crimes per 100k people, per year. What a convenient figure for this demonstration, 1 per day!!!

I don't have actual statistics links to back this up because in the UK, thankfully gun crime isn't a problem worth creating statistics for! However, I live in a city in the UK with 200k people in it. It's very violent here and is famous for football hooliganism. You could even say the city had been 'bred for war' for the last thousand years, because there isn't a major war my local ancestors have missed in centuries; we love a good fight!

We've had 2 shootings in this city in 40 years and only one of them died. That equates to 0.025 per 100k per year. This works out to 6.84932E-05 per day. I'm no mathematician, so I apologise if my calculations are wrong, but I think this means my children are 14600% less likely to get shot at watching Batman than yours.

If that wasn't enough, here's another report produced only a few days ago by your own doctors about gun crime that says all you gun lovers in this thread are talking bull#

it completely disagrees with your bad assumption that more guns make life safer. US not a safe place to be

I'd be concerned if my kids were 10%, 100% or even 1000% more likely to get shot at. 14,600% more liekly??? Thank god I don't live in DC!

reply to post by DaMod


Don't scare poor old bubba with such nasty words that he can't have a 30,000 rpm 50 cal under each arm for going mosquito hunting

reply to post by 200Plus


read my last post x

reply to post by MikeNice81


I dont think the homicide rate does include the suicide rate in that data , it seems its quite separate

Percent of deaths due to injury*:

Motor vehicle traffic: 44.1
Homicide (firearm): 18.2
Poisoning: 8.0
Suicide (firearm): 6.0
Suicide (suffocation): 5.9

reply to post by TerraLiga




but the REALLY misleading bit is where people make the claim that because there are no guns, there's less crime....

tell me, how many people in the UK get beaten to death per year? how many stabbed to death? how many killed, or put in hospital with common household items, or other weapons of opportunity...

not everyone who get shot, dies.

reply to post by Beavers


i'm wondering at what point it's going to get through your skull that guns don't kill people by themselves, anymore than knives, or bats, or pointed sticks do.....THE PEOPLE OPERATING THEM KILL PEOPLE...

we don't need less guns, we need less violent/crazy/evil som'bitches...

I'm also wondering if you could bother yourself to argue the facts, and figures, instead of resorting to this weak-ass tactic of baseless assertions, and appeals to emotion....the denizens of ATS don't want your kids dead...the 2nd amendment crowd doesn't want your kids dead....you know who wants your kids dead? bad people...the kind of people who will end you, and everyone around you if you don't give them your purse, or wallet....who, if they break into your house, might just rape or kill all of you, because witnesses are inconvenient.....they're the kind of people who do things like virginia tech, and aurora....we're not the bad guys...we don't want your kids dead...stop using your kids as a debating tool, it's so base, and classless...

reply to post by Beavers


and that's the ball game....

the only people nailing you with a fatal wound from a football field away with a frigging pistol, is someone who has trained A LOT, and has serious marksmanship skills....that's a hell of a shot....

...this whole thing really works a LOT better, if you know what you're talking about...

reply to post by Daedalus


read my last main post, game over.