Lethal weapon: This is the gun that is killing America

Reply to OP only.

Hawk, do you even believe there are as many " crazy man "
shootings going on involving the AR, as there seem to be.
At such perfectly convenient time.
Or would you say they're obviously being ,shall we say> influenced?

White, young adult, male, gov.perpetuated drugs both pharma and street.

EarthCitizen07

Pejeu

Hmmm. That might be true.

But still, you can't keep claiming that more guns = less crime (of the prosecutable kind) and fewer gun shot deaths.

All the liberal strongholds, which includes most big cities in america, have staggeringly higher crime rates. Illegal guns are easy to acquire if you know the right people in those places, while the tough gun laws in relation to concealed carry make it incredibly easy for law abiding people to fall victim to people who both bought and carry illegally.

Metropolitan areas also have staggeringly high population densities.

And they are overwhelmingly where residents of suburban or rural areas commute to work in.

And where the malls, shopping areas, entertainment venues and restaurants are.

I think a lot or most of the high profile cases are indeed orchestrated events done for the sole purpose of scaring people into submitting to increasingly tougher gun laws, when the second amendment makes it clear there should be no regulation for firearms(any gun that is an extension of your arm). Pistol, shotguns, submachine guns, semi-auto rifle. All of the current gun laws are illegal but never challenged by anyone, thus they get away with it.

I think it's just more convenient to believe or pretend to believe they're government 'psyop' or 'mind control' subjects.

Than to simply honestly accept and admit it as the toll of the gun culture.

That that guy that shot up those school kids could have just as easily been your next door neighbour.

reply to post by Pejeu


There is plenty of crime happening everday in america, but the media chooses certain venues to demonise certain guns in blitz cycles. Ten schools may get shotup in 10 days, then government finds the convenient opportunity to try and pass laws that seem to solve the problem. Then no more school shootings for another year, its all forgotten about.

No coincidence you say? Please!

Pejeu

Metropolitan areas also have staggeringly high population densities.

And they are overwhelmingly where residents of suburban or rural areas commute to work in.

And where the malls, shopping areas, entertainment venues and restaurants are.

Population density is somewhat of a factor, but there are other variables that are more important. Look at the rate of violent crime in cities like Seoul or Tokyo. Both ROK and Japan have almost completely gun free societies. Tokyo and Seoul are two of the most densely populated cities on the planet. Violent crime is paltry compared to other similarly sized and dense cities. Why? Homogeneity is one reason. ROK and Japan are two of the most homogenous, both ethnically and culturally, societies on the planet. Around the world there is a strong correlation between homogeneity of a society and the crime rate. With all the boons that diversity brings, one of the majors busts that has to be accepted is the potential for a hugely inflated violent crime rate.

Another major indicator of violent crime rate is IQ, or basic unlearned intelligence. Again, Japan and South Korea have national averages > 105. Lets look at the areas in urban USA where crimes are committed. They are typically in "diverse" neighborhoods containing populations with relatively low IQ. These two variables have such a significant impact on crime statistics worldwide as to make the availability of firearms or lack thereof a variable of almost null value.

reply to post by Galvatron

Ethnic and cultural homogeneity may have a disproportionate effect on gun violence and firearm related death rate. That is a very interesting point.

As might intelligence.

But I posit the availability of guns themselves as well as the standard of living and the economic opportunities, social mobility available and overall standard of living of the average citizen hold the most sway.

That's why the US, by far the most heavily armed society in the world, is not also the most violent though pretty violent. Because it is still a very rich and prosperous country.

Despite having exported much of its manufacturing base and relying on reserve currency and petrodollar status to keep it going the way it is.

However, a decline in prosperity and the standard of living might have a huge effect on gun violence statistic seeing how widespread firearm ownership already is.

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Pejeu

 

There is plenty of crime happening everday in america, but the media chooses certain venues to demonise certain guns in blitz cycles. Ten schools may get shotup in 10 days, then government finds the convenient opportunity to try and pass laws that seem to solve the problem. Then no more school shootings for another year, its all forgotten about.

No coincidence you say? Please!

I wouldn't know. I don't think we've ever had a school shooting here.

reply to post by Pejeu


If you remove the violent crime committed in cities under the guise of gang conflicts or drugs, the gun crime statistics of the US fall in line with Europe, despite the huge availability of firearms to citizens, despite the US being one of the most diverse countries on the planet.

Of the ~11,000 murders by firearms in the US, 8,900 are attributed to inner-city gang violence. That is to say, criminals killing criminals.

www.cdc.gov...

Edit: The fact that the US has rampage shootings is a symptom of a societal system on the precipice of something bad. It has more to do with how crappy and devolved our societal system has become than it has to do with the availability of firearms.

reply to post by Pejeu


Organised crime exists everywhere and these people will always have guns despite what the law says. Organised crime is not discussed much because the people behind these groups are too important to mess with.

School shootings make for great emotional propaganda and thus easily discussed. Nearly all the school shootings happen in gun free zones where the operatives can just walk in and start shooting away with no one to bother them.

This is basic common sense that if civilians are armed they dont make easy targets. The police cannot be everywhere at the same time to deter and apprehend criminals. Civilians need to shoulder some of the responsibility themselves.

Galvatron
Look at the rate of violent crime in cities like Seoul or Tokyo. Both ROK and Japan have almost completely gun free societies.

On this point, I would respectfully disagree. I have lived in Seoul most of my adult life. If Koreans could buy guns they would ... and they would use them liberally on each other IMVHO. The male of this culture is constantly seething beneath the surface and they are prone to explosive outbursts. They act in the moment all too frequently. Wouldn't take much for guns in this society to cause a comparative avalanche of murder. Think Virginia Tech.

EarthCitizen07


This is basic common sense that if civilians are armed they dont make easy targets. The police cannot be everywhere at the same time to deter and apprehend criminals. Civilians need to shoulder some of the responsibility themselves.

That's a good point. In my line of work, there is something called a "hard target". Basically it's when a person, position, whatever, looks ready to fight back at a moment's notice. So if I'm outside of a vehicle waiting for a delivery to finish, I'm not relaxing with my rifle slung, smoking a ciggie. Both hands are on my rifle, I've got my game face on, and I'm looking for threats or anything odd constantly. Anyone looking at my team would immediately have the twinge of doubt enter their minds, and sometimes it's the only thing required to diffuse a potential engagement.

Likewise, criminals typically don't go after people who they think are armed, like they typically don't, unless desperate or bold, go after homes that are presently inhabited.

reply to post by Snarl


While that may be true, the violent statistics are really really tame compared to other huge cities like Mexico City, New York, or Sao Paulo.

South Korea has an average of ~15 homicides by firearm per year... for the whole country.

Galvatron
reply to post by Snarl

 

While that may be true, the violent statistics are really really tame compared to other huge cities like Mexico City, New York, or Sao Paulo.

South Korea has an average of ~15 homicides by firearm per year... for the whole country.

edit on 7-11-2013 by Galvatron because: (no reason given)

There is almost no chance of your average Korean citizen gaining unrestricted access to a firearm. My POINT was, when a Korean snaps, they tend to set records. This country is better without them.

Galvatron
reply to post by Snarl

 

While that may be true, the violent statistics are really really tame compared to other huge cities like Mexico City, New York, or Sao Paulo.

South Korea has an average of ~15 homicides by firearm per year... for the whole country.

edit on 7-11-2013 by Galvatron because: (no reason given)

Who needs weapons when you're a kung-fu master? Watz you say?..aaaabbbbboooooo smack, kick, headbut, takedown, pin.

Bruce Lee style!!!!!!

reply to post by Snarl


I married one of those...what fun she was.

reply to post by Pejeu
While discussing heavily armed societies. Want to include the Swiss. They still require mandatory military or government service at 19. Government only if you are unfit or incapable of preforming military service. Last I heard, after training and brief service each reservist, until age 45, retains his military firearm, ammunition and uniform in his house. The Swiss speak three languages, with the cultures of all three common in the Nation. They only agree to a Federal government for those things, such as National Defense, diplomacy and such, that require a single voice. Then, only I.Q. and standard of living seem to be higher than average. Oh yes, they just approved by a huge margin, a referendum to maintain compulsory military/government service.
Now, for the culture/social consideration. While true that some Nations have a higher level of social cohesion and apparent harmony. Look carefully. Japanese students are expected to and are accepted for extreme behavior and styles. Such as teenager girls dressing like baby dolls. Teenage boys wearing leathers and motorcycle boots, James Dean or Wild Ones style. In Holland, one day a year is set aside for fireworks, illegal even on that day. But, the population manages to light up the region. There has to be a relief valve for social demands and tensions. The U.S. has successful suppressed or eliminated common experiences and acceptable ways of acting and dressing in public as a relief for the individual for tensions and pressures.

TrueBrit
reply to post by AlphaHawk

 

Hmm. Shall we look at the percentage of gun owners who possess one of these rifles, and then compare the number of people who own one, with the number of people who have committed murder with them?

What a ridiculous story. Back ten years it would have been a tech nine, or an UZI, back further than that a 22. pistol, favoured by mafia as an assassination weapon, or the sawn off which is a dear friend to stick up merchants, and bank robbers everywhere.

Lets be real about this. A gun is a lump of metal. Left to its own devices, or handled by responsible owners, it is no more likely to kill someone than is a house brick, or an engine block, or a plastic bag. In the hands of a complete lunatic, or someone suffering symptoms of a schizoid or psychotic malfunction however, ANYTHING can become a tool of mass murder.

I could go out right now with a shopping bag, and stalk and suffocate as many people as I could before being detected and detained. I reckon I could kill as many people as have been dropped in any one of the incidents featured in the article, inside of one day using just a shopping bag, and whats worse is, the way I would do it, no one would ever know I was there, but for the eventual stink of a well hidden corpse or forty. No noise, no warning, just a brief and futile struggle before oblivion sets in.

However, being the well adjusted sort that I am, I refrain from such activity, because I am not incapable of reason, and my morality would prevent me from doing something so evil as to randomly stalk and kill people. THAT is what is killing Americans right now. An unwillingness or inability to properly deal with the psychological issues which affect its citizens, a failure which has lead to these disaffected, damaged individuals being allowed to play their psychoses out with life and death hanging in the balance!

I

Well lets all thank god you are sane.

So oh very wise sane ONE answer me this riddle
:
If automatic weapons are so safe why are they being choosen to:
Arm armys
provide the terror in terrorist
give the police more umph
OR to kill people randomly in malls, theaters and airports.


Because an automatic weapon IS designed to kill people. It's the right tool for that job. An engine block is not.

So please provide another example of how many "neato" ways you can kill people ...to display how well thought out the things you say are.

Then brag about your right to keep and use a weapon that a hunter would be ashamed to to use on a big game animal.

TKDRL
reply to post by Pejeu

 

Stop putting words into my mouth and projecting your mentality onto me, [self censored, got upset, took the troll bait].

You want to let people take your livelyhood be my guest. The only thing I have of real value for some scumbag to steal is my tools, what puts food on my table. Guns are one of those tools.

If someone thinks they have a right to take food off my table to put onto theirs, they are wrong.

edit on Thu, 07 Nov 2013 10:16:22 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

Are you in the army? Then a an Automatic weapon is indeed a legimate tool for you.
Are you a police officer? Then is some cases you might carry an automatic weapon.
Are you a hunter? Then you are not a good one if you need an automatic weapon.

Can you actually justify using any sort of weapon at work?

reply to post by DeadSteve1234


the topic was NOT about automatic weapons though, and that was not what he was referring to. He was referring to guns period. The AR-15 is NOT an automatic weapon and that weapon was the specific one described in the OP.

kingofyo1
reply to post by DeadSteve1234

 

the topic was NOT about automatic weapons though, and that was not what he was referring to. He was referring to guns period. The AR-15 is NOT an automatic weapon and that weapon was the specific one described in the OP.

Fair enough.

But most of the preceding 14 pages have been, basically a debate on gun ownership with a heavy lean towards favoring the arming the general population. It has even been discussed that the 5.56 round is under powered for the "job".
What job?
Why does the general population need to be the miltia when the USA choose to establish a professional citizen army?

DeadSteve1234

kingofyo1
reply to post by DeadSteve1234

 

the topic was NOT about automatic weapons though, and that was not what he was referring to. He was referring to guns period. The AR-15 is NOT an automatic weapon and that weapon was the specific one described in the OP.

Fair enough.

But most of the preceding 14 pages have been, basically a debate on gun ownership with a heavy lean towards favoring the arming the general population. It has even been discussed that the 5.56 round is under powered for the "job".
What job?
Why does the general population need to be the miltia when the USA choose to establish a professional citizen army?

Honestly? The job that guns were designed for in the first place.. Killing/maiming. The general population needs to be the militia simply because when the military becomes too disarmed to protect the citizens, they're going to have to protect themselves. I know as an airman that unless we get put on front lines, we NEVER have a weapon in our hands except for qualification on duty. Marines and army are different, but some of us have only fired our weapons once, and that was in basic. Think who youd rather have defending you.. Yourself, who can shoot at will and train at will, or a supply troop for instance who barely passed qualification? id rather get a pistol or rifle and become proficient!

reply to post by DeadSteve1234


More people are killed in hit and runs than have been murdered with an AR-15. You want your right to own and drive a car curtailed because of it? The way something is designed is not nearly as important as the way it is used, and in the vast percentage of cases, owners of AR-15 rifles do not use them for killing innocent people in their droves. The ONLY factor which leads to such deaths, is a persons choice to kill, and it doesn't matter if they use a rifle, or a brick, or a rock or a knife, they WILL kill innocent people if they chose to do so.

The people who do these things need stopping before they do them, that's the only appropriate response to these massacres, because the people who do them are the problem. It is they who decide that they can take it into their heads to kill, it is they who are not properly monitored. These people are in all but the very rarest of cases, previously diagnosed as having one or another serious mental dysfunction, and when they have not been so diagnosed that's often because someone wasn't doing their job properly.

Learning how to deal with the responsible parties, before they get their hands on weapons, THAT will be effective and proportionate. Any attempt to ban weapons will only lead to an under armed populous, an over armed criminal underclass (who will totally ignore the ban) and a population which cannot defend itself against tyranny in even the smallest of ways.