An argument in favour of stricter gun control laws in SA

Cosmik Debris

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
17,063
I think it should be pretty obvious that reducing firearm ownership will reduce violence. Take a look at countries with very few firearms globally from Botswana to Japan, Australia and the UK.

Take a look at the recent riots we had, what if more of the rioters had firearms? Would have obviously led to more violence.

You can only control legal firearms. And what if the defenders didn't have legal firearms?
 

Cosmik Debris

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
17,063
I think it should be pretty obvious that reducing firearm ownership will reduce violence. Take a look at countries with very few firearms globally from Botswana to Japan, Australia and the UK.

Take a look at the recent riots we had, what if more of the rioters had firearms? Would have obviously led to more violence.

No it doesn't. Violence is societal. The perpetrator will use whatever is at hand. Like knives in the UK now.
 

mojoman

Expert Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
1,431
I think it should be pretty obvious that reducing firearm ownership will reduce violence. Take a look at countries with very few firearms globally from Botswana to Japan, Australia and the UK.

Take a look at the recent riots we had, what if more of the rioters had firearms? Would have obviously led to more violence.
 

Attachments

  • choke-food.gif
    choke-food.gif
    258.5 KB · Views: 16

Hemi300c

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
23,775
I think it should be pretty obvious that reducing firearm ownership will reduce violence. Take a look at countries with very few firearms globally from Botswana to Japan, Australia and the UK.

Take a look at the recent riots we had, what if more of the rioters had firearms? Would have obviously led to more violence.
It is more obvious that the criminals in SA have no value for life or limb and the honest law obeying citizen will be at more risk because crimes will escalate and violence will escalate as well.
 

alanB

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
589
Hypocritically hiding behind their armed response.
It's always the same thing - the people calling for OTHER PEOPLE to be rendered helpless against criminals, have their own armed guards to protect them!

They use the reasoning of "why would anyone ever need to hurt anyone else", while making sure that OTHER PEOPLE have to keep them safe.

They won't take responsibility for their own safety, expecting someone else to do that for them. And then apply that same reasoning to those that cannot afford armed guards, thinking that somehow makes them morally superior.

It's worse than hypocritical - it's malicious and callous IMO! At best this sort of thinking is just delusional and naive (but I don't believe anyone is really that naive), at worst it's manipulative and disdainful.

If you refuse to take any precautions to defend yourself, that's fine, although don't expect others to help in the event that you need it, although they might. But don't go out of your way to impose your own broken logic on others!
 

Milano

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Messages
16,696
Really like as if R4's and AK's are being sourced from private licensed firearm owners. If the government was in fact anti-crime they would make an actual effort to stop SAPS and SANDF members committing so many of the crimes for starters.

As usual the primary problem remains government and its organs of state. First remove the firearms of all police officers and give them batons to show the public how this will work.

It is far more likely that the vast majority of illegal weapons are sold out the back door of police stations, stolen from police stations, the navy and the army, get brought in across the porous borders that the government fails to police, and likely much worse that has not yet even been uncovered.

Besides if it were true that most are stolen from legal private licence holders then the solution would not involve punishing those who are compliant with the law. The solution would be to apprehend and punish those breaking the law. Begin by re-creating a competent professional police force that answers the phone, has operational vehicles, attends call outs, have driver's licenses, are less obese, sleep less on duty, know how to use a firearm, and commit less crime. You know, one based on actually being a good police officer.

Until then government should go back to what it does best, stealing.
 

ProfA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
13,100
I think it should be pretty obvious that reducing firearm ownership will reduce violence. Take a look at countries with very few firearms globally from Botswana to Japan, Australia and the UK.

Take a look at the recent riots we had, what if more of the rioters had firearms? Would have obviously led to more violence.
what utter twaddle.
 

Supervan II

Expert Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
2,518
It's always the same thing - the people calling for OTHER PEOPLE to be rendered helpless against criminals, have their own armed guards to protect them!

They use the reasoning of "why would anyone ever need to hurt anyone else", while making sure that OTHER PEOPLE have to keep them safe.

They won't take responsibility for their own safety, expecting someone else to do that for them. And then apply that same reasoning to those that cannot afford armed guards, thinking that somehow makes them morally superior.

It's worse than hypocritical - it's malicious and callous IMO! At best this sort of thinking is just delusional and naive (but I don't believe anyone is really that naive), at worst it's manipulative and disdainful.

If you refuse to take any precautions to defend yourself, that's fine, although don't expect others to help in the event that you need it, although they might. But don't go out of your way to impose your own broken logic on others!
E2El9kcWEAgcG4W.jpg
 

John Tempus

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
5,828
This government is entirely disconnected from reality in SA.

Herpa derp guns kill so lets ban guns even more but criminals don't give a fk about bans else they wouldn't be criminals.

Our government seems to be completely stupid and blind and if they think there is a problem they propose more laws rather than enforcing the current laws and actually doing their job on the ground.
 

John Tempus

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
5,828
There have also been large scale police operations in high crime areas, which have involved the deployment of military personnel with the objective of confiscating as many illegal firearms as possible, and arresting those in possession of such weapons. My own research has shown that these have been particularly effective at reducing levels of firearm violence


Quote from article

Taking weapons back to the police stations just to have the same weapons "stolen" as shown in reports.

Police stations seems to the be central hub where criminals just walk in and collect firearms and the police seems to be clueless on how that is happening.
 

John Tempus

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
5,828
I think it should be pretty obvious that reducing firearm ownership will reduce violence. Take a look at countries with very few firearms globally from Botswana to Japan, Australia and the UK.

Take a look at the recent riots we had, what if more of the rioters had firearms? Would have obviously led to more violence.

If more citizens had firearms I can promise you the riots would not even have gone on longer than a few hours if not minutes.

Imagine every shop owner had a licensed gun in their shop, end of story.
 

John Tempus

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
5,828
No it doesn't. Violence is societal. The perpetrator will use whatever is at hand. Like knives in the UK now.

Oh no don't give our government ideas. I really like cutting my steak with a sharp knife.

Soon they will be confiscating knives at this rate.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Swa

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
30,124
Fun fact, there are more murders in SA in 5 days than there are knife murders in a year in the UK.
The fact is still that they traded guns for knives. Can't really compare different cultures.
 

Dave

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
59,746
The fact is still that they traded guns for knives. Can't really compare different cultures.

yes, a whole 0.75 knife deaths per day.

PS
The murder rate in England and Wales has actually gone down since the late 90s when handguns were effectively banned.
 
Last edited:

alanB

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
589
yes, a whole 0.75 knife deaths per day.

PS
The murder rate in England and Wales has actually gone down since the late 90s when handguns were effectively banned.
I'l say it again, the high crime rate in SA is not cause by legal gun ownership by law abiding citizens - as much as you may dislike the fact that other people own guns.

The problem is quite simple.

If you create a criminal friendly environment, then criminals will respond accordingly.

If you say that people are not allowed to protect their own property from criminals - well I'm sure criminals will appreciate that.

If you do not have the political will to prevent criminal activity, then criminals will become more emboldened.

If criminals know that the police are not that effective, and that they will probably not get caught, crime will be seen to pay.

If the politicians themselves are criminals...

I could go on, but surely you get point?

It's got NOTHING to do with law abiding people owning guns!
 
Top