^ yep, you're right.. and there are also scores of incidents, every single day in this country, where a law-abiding citizen, lawfully carrying a weapon, thwarts criminal/violent crime.
A killer shoots 5 people in a shopping mall at Espoo, Finland
- Thread starter ahjteam
- Start date
Ironbird666
Member
- Jul 11, 2004
- 229
- 0
- 16
Most "assault weapons" are smaller caliber than most hunting rifles. The over blown hype involving the AR15 family of weapons is almost sickening to most gun owners. It's just not as evil as people make it out to be. A person with even a little bit of training can kill quite a few unarmed citizens with a pistol and a few magazines very easily. Also, to get a rifle that has select fire or three round burst you have to go through an extensive process with the BATF as well as pay a large sum of money for a permit, which has to be with the firearm at all times. As for banning them, does it stop felons from obtaining them? You have far, FAR worse reasons to fear what's already on the street in the hands of hardened, drug-hazed criminals then what's in Joe Dude's closet. You ever went to bank? How often are banks robbed? How often are convenience stores robbed? Bottom line: statistically, you're fucked either way, if it's going to happen it's going to happen and I'd hope that someone besides me is carrying. IMO
Chryst Krispies
Vanilla Gorilla
Eddy
Old fart on this board
I don't think anykind of strictening of gun laws would have prevented this from happening. The gun he used was illegal.
The guy had criminal history. He has been convicted twice before for having illegal firearm in his possession (in 2004 and 2007). He was also convicted of assault (in 2006). And there's also other stuff in his record too.
From what I can gather, these were premeditated murders and not a "heat of the moment" kind of thing.
So having the average citizen to go through the hoops to get a gun permit, would not have done shit to prevent this from happening IMO.
Not exactly that easy... Or at least it shouldn't be:
Re: Gun culture: In Finland all gun permits are issued for either sports shooting (or target practise) or hunting. Licences are not issued for self defense purposes. So there is a difference between the US and Finland in that regard.
The guy had criminal history. He has been convicted twice before for having illegal firearm in his possession (in 2004 and 2007). He was also convicted of assault (in 2006). And there's also other stuff in his record too.
From what I can gather, these were premeditated murders and not a "heat of the moment" kind of thing.
So having the average citizen to go through the hoops to get a gun permit, would not have done shit to prevent this from happening IMO.
Not exactly that easy... Or at least it shouldn't be:
http://www.intermin.fi/intermin/home.nsf/Pages/A7DA6895CA41BF94C22574D400423635 said:
Re: Gun culture: In Finland all gun permits are issued for either sports shooting (or target practise) or hunting. Licences are not issued for self defense purposes. So there is a difference between the US and Finland in that regard.
Mutant
I hate that supercow !
Don't forget that the main use of a firearm is to protect lives and property.
So removing guns from hands of good people would make it a lot harder for police to do their job.
Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms
"In 1994, about 14 million adults (approximately one-third of gun owners) at least once carried a firearm in their vehicles or on their person for protection."
"NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders."
Page #8, Exhibit 7: (Year 1994) Estimated numbers of defenders = 1500000, estimated number of defensive gun uses = 4700000
So removing guns from hands of good people would make it a lot harder for police to do their job.
Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms
"In 1994, about 14 million adults (approximately one-third of gun owners) at least once carried a firearm in their vehicles or on their person for protection."
"NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders."
Page #8, Exhibit 7: (Year 1994) Estimated numbers of defenders = 1500000, estimated number of defensive gun uses = 4700000
It's highly unlikely they would enforce any firearm legislation on police. BTW any legislation of that sort will not go into both houses of legislation any time soon, just because it's a huge gridlock of an issue anywhere in the United States and the supreme court would rather rule/debate/interpret about something else in the constitution. That is also why gay rights and abortion is not being talked about at the supreme court as much as many think it is and only huge talk at the state level of government among officials and sometimes by democrats and the president.
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
I'm torn on this issue. I see it negatively both ways. Ultimately the existence of guns in itself, and peoples' inclination to use them is the root problem. Obviously, us being the genetic shitbags we are this isn't going to change, ever. I think the path of least evil in this case is to just let everyone arm themselves, and let the fear in itself be the deterrent. As a small-time criminal, if you have to wonder whether your mark is able to turn the tables on you all the time, you may be forced to double-take more often. Either that or you become more inclined to shoot first and sort through the mess later. Either way it's more a matter of chance than anything else.
There is no good solution to this. The problem lies within people, and once again, you cannot legislate sanity or common sense. So flip that coin and hope that whichever side it lands on aligns with fate being on your side.
There is no good solution to this. The problem lies within people, and once again, you cannot legislate sanity or common sense. So flip that coin and hope that whichever side it lands on aligns with fate being on your side.
http://poliisi.fi/poliisi/home.nsf/pages/2B272BB7376DA041C2256BDD002CF870?opendocument
Aseen hankkimislupa voidaan myöntää vain, jos aseen hankkimiseen on hyväksyttävä käyttötarkoitus.
Hyväksyttäviä käyttötarkoituksia ovat:
# metsästyslainsäädännön mukaan sallittu eläinten ampuminen
# ampumaurheilu ja –harrastus
# työ, jossa ase on välttämätön
# näytös, kuvaus tai muu vastaava esitys
# museossa tai kokoelmassa pitäminen
# muistoesineenä säilyttäminen
# merkinanto
http://poliisi.fi/poliisi/home.nsf/pages/C72E58A5707DBF7CC2256C45003923A1?opendocument
A firearm acquisition permit may be granted only if it is to be acquired for an approved purpose.
Approved purposes of use are:
# shooting of animals as permitted by hunting legislation
# shooting competitions and other target shooting
# work in which a firearm is necessary
# demonstration, filming or other similar presentation
# keeping in a museum or collection
# keeping as a memento
# signalling.
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Dude, there really aren't that many places in the civilized world where that kind of environment actually exists
no, but the ones that do exist... like the town in Texas that has something like 90%+ gun ownership, most of them with Concealed Carry permits.. have very low crime rates.
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
As a UK citizen i don't feel the need for a gun. Carrying pretty much any weapon around with you is just asking to get your head blown off in my opinion.
The majority of crimes are for the money in your pocket or your mobile phone/ipod/car etc... i.e. they don't have the intent of killing you.
If you don't fight back chances are you stay alive.
If you pull a gun and your unlucky and they pull a gun as well, the chance of you ending up dead suddenly increased several-fold. Remember, they're more likely to shoot than you are, they came looking for trouble in the first place after all.
The majority of crimes are for the money in your pocket or your mobile phone/ipod/car etc... i.e. they don't have the intent of killing you.
If you don't fight back chances are you stay alive.
If you pull a gun and your unlucky and they pull a gun as well, the chance of you ending up dead suddenly increased several-fold. Remember, they're more likely to shoot than you are, they came looking for trouble in the first place after all.
Mutant
I hate that supercow !
LOL
Thats a fine example of the classical victim mentality.
Some people would rather let a criminal decide if they will live or die than have a choice to fight for their lives...
I'd prefer to have a say in such a crucial matter.
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Likewise, and the problem is that the whole nation here advocates that victim mentality. We have absolutely no powers to fight back with reasonable force. If someone attacks with a knife, we only have the legal right to defend ourselves with lesser to equal force, so I can't pull a gun on the prick. Even if I did Muay thai for years and I defend myself hand-to-hand that legally qualifies as using a weapon here.
Our respective governments and police forces are obviously incapable of cutting down crime significantly enough for it not to affect the average citizen in some way or another. If the system is that deficient, the very least they can do is legally empower the citizen to defend their own lives through whichever means necessary. The problem is that people here are of a particularly moronic breed and always want it both ways - which ultimately leads to it just not working in any way.
Our respective governments and police forces are obviously incapable of cutting down crime significantly enough for it not to affect the average citizen in some way or another. If the system is that deficient, the very least they can do is legally empower the citizen to defend their own lives through whichever means necessary. The problem is that people here are of a particularly moronic breed and always want it both ways - which ultimately leads to it just not working in any way.
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
Myself i don't care whether i had a say in it, if i'm more likely to stay alive.
Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):
Homicide Suicide Other (inc Accident)
USA (2001) 3.98 5.92 0.36
Italy (1997) 0.81 1.1 0.07
Switzerland (1998) 0.50 5.8 0.10
Canada (2002) 0.4 2.0 0.04
Finland (2003) 0.35 4.45 0.10
Australia (2001) 0.24 1.34 0.10
France (2001) 0.21 3.4 0.49
England/Wales (2002) 0.15 0.2 0.03
Scotland (2002) 0.06 0.2 0.02
Japan (2002) 0.02 0.04 0
Data taken from Cukier and Sidel (2006) The Global Gun Epidemic. Praeger Security International. Westport.
There's something happening in the US that's getting people shot, thats for sure
The top 4 countries there all have liberal gun laws, the bottom 4 all have very strict gun laws.
and those countries are completely different than the US... the US only EXISTS because the citizens had guns... NOT true at all of the other countries... not a valid comparison. our country exists BASED on the citizenry being armed, and we wouldn't have managed it otherwise.
anyway, i've seen different sets of statistics, and i doubt the total validity of the ones you've posted. i don't, however, doubt there's more per capita gun crime in the US... but there are several interesting points to note about that...
1. as mentioned before, the US is unique in having been founded by armed citzenry. sure others had armed peasant uprisings, but the replacement power structures were never "for the people, by the people", at least not is so direct a way as happened in the US. besides, i don't see France making anti-guillotine laws, lol (just a little joke, don't take that bit seriously).
2. it's interesting that many of the worst hot spots of gun crime in the US are immigrant communities and border cities and towns. sure, there's plenty... more than plenty... elsewhere, but these demographics certainly skew the stats in very disproportionate ways. i'd love to see how Japan would fare if it shared a border with Mexico.
3. and this one is of great note to me... none of these types of stats ever take into account how much crime ... violent crime, including murder... is averted via the intervention of responsible, armed citizens. it's quite a large stat, you'll find.
4. the fact is that the genie is out of the bottle, and gun crime is on the rise everywhere... and it will get worse.. and worse. more laws won't help, unless they directly address the causes and the illegal pipelines, rather than simply restricting law-abiding citizens from having the ability and legal recourse to protect themselves and their families.
i could keep going.. there are so many mitigating factors regarding the US and it's high gun crime stats in regard to it's heritage, it's "neighborhood", and it's immigration and drug policies, that work to spin the numbers to the point that it should be imminently clear that it's not as black & white as it might seem if you are simply looking at comparative charts based on numbers only.
e.g., how much more illegal drug activity would Holland have if it hadn't legalized certain drugs? how much more sex-trade crime would Germany have if there weren't legalized prostitution?. how much less crime would there be in Greece had the border and immigration controls not been relaxed regarding Turkish immigrants some time back?
the problem at the end of the day is not guns, it's criminals. and i definitely won't argue with anyone who wants to make the point that the US has more than it's fair share of criminals, and that's where my position's strength actually lies; criminals don't obey laws. so, more gun laws won't work so well here, and they haven't so far. all they've managed to do here is restrict the law-abiding citizen's ability to defend ourselves.
you can live in a "Helpless Victim Zone" if you want.... i'd rather not though, thanks.
anyway, i've seen different sets of statistics, and i doubt the total validity of the ones you've posted. i don't, however, doubt there's more per capita gun crime in the US... but there are several interesting points to note about that...
1. as mentioned before, the US is unique in having been founded by armed citzenry. sure others had armed peasant uprisings, but the replacement power structures were never "for the people, by the people", at least not is so direct a way as happened in the US. besides, i don't see France making anti-guillotine laws, lol (just a little joke, don't take that bit seriously).
2. it's interesting that many of the worst hot spots of gun crime in the US are immigrant communities and border cities and towns. sure, there's plenty... more than plenty... elsewhere, but these demographics certainly skew the stats in very disproportionate ways. i'd love to see how Japan would fare if it shared a border with Mexico.
3. and this one is of great note to me... none of these types of stats ever take into account how much crime ... violent crime, including murder... is averted via the intervention of responsible, armed citizens. it's quite a large stat, you'll find.
4. the fact is that the genie is out of the bottle, and gun crime is on the rise everywhere... and it will get worse.. and worse. more laws won't help, unless they directly address the causes and the illegal pipelines, rather than simply restricting law-abiding citizens from having the ability and legal recourse to protect themselves and their families.
i could keep going.. there are so many mitigating factors regarding the US and it's high gun crime stats in regard to it's heritage, it's "neighborhood", and it's immigration and drug policies, that work to spin the numbers to the point that it should be imminently clear that it's not as black & white as it might seem if you are simply looking at comparative charts based on numbers only.
e.g., how much more illegal drug activity would Holland have if it hadn't legalized certain drugs? how much more sex-trade crime would Germany have if there weren't legalized prostitution?. how much less crime would there be in Greece had the border and immigration controls not been relaxed regarding Turkish immigrants some time back?
the problem at the end of the day is not guns, it's criminals. and i definitely won't argue with anyone who wants to make the point that the US has more than it's fair share of criminals, and that's where my position's strength actually lies; criminals don't obey laws. so, more gun laws won't work so well here, and they haven't so far. all they've managed to do here is restrict the law-abiding citizen's ability to defend ourselves.
you can live in a "Helpless Victim Zone" if you want.... i'd rather not though, thanks.
drew_drummer
Dancefap
How high are the rates of suicide, and accidental death due to gunshot wounds?
drew_drummer
Dancefap
Yeah. Kinda hard to slaughter a million dark-skinned people when all you've got is a feather duster and some soil based building materials.
