The Sandy Hook Elementary School Shootings

[OrbitalDawn]

Luckily Harvard did a study not so long ago on gun censorship, people often only point out low crimes with gun regulation in western Europe countries, while they for some other reason (I'm guessing to deliberately distort facts) neglect Brazil and Russia or other countries with heavy regulation, in their statistics.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

The authors:

Don B. Kates
http://www.nradefensefund.org/supported-research.aspx

Gary Mauser
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/i...-gun-registry-doesn't-work-and-never-did.aspx

They're NRA shills? Hah, priceless.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Except the study is nonsense. Table 2 has Luxembourg's murder rate as 9.01.

The Guardian has it at 0.4 around 2004

Nationmaster has it around 0.9 for 2002

Trading Economics has it at 0.4 around 2004

UNODC has it at around 1.5 in 2006



Where did Messrs Kate and Mauser get their info from, any idea?

from the article

Notes: This table covers all the European nations for which the infor‐
mation given is available. As in Table 1, the homicide rate data comes
from an annually published report, CANADIAN CENTRE FOR JUSTICE
STATISTICS, HOMICIDE IN CANADA, JURISTAT.**

sounds more legit to me than some newspaper....

I don't know how much you make of this

http://www.wort.lu/en/view/luxembourg-saw-14-7-increase-in-crime-in-2011-4f706e20e4b0f18adeb486fa

 

[Nicodeamus]

They're NRA shills? Hah, priceless.

ah yes after people cannot refute evidence, they do the second thing that comes to mind. Character dehumanization...

anything funded by the NRA is therefore simply wrong and just propaganda. It has to be!

 

[OrbitalDawn]

ah yes after people cannot refute evidence, they do the second thing that comes to mind. Character dehumanization...

anything funded by the NRA is therefore simply wrong and just propaganda. It has to be!

Character dehumanization? That's a bit strong, isn't it? He obviously has a vested interest in the NRA's cause, since they provide employment and funding. Just keep that in mind.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Character dehumanization? That's a bit strong, isn't it? He obviously has a vested interest in the NRA's cause, since they provide employment and funding. Just keep that in mind.

yes, but that doesn't mean that his research is corrupted automatically.

It would make sense for the NRA to fund research such as this, whether they would have used it, had its results provided the contrary is another question.

 

[w1z4rd]

 

[BigBullBully]

Can I ask you a question Ghoti, do you support globalisation, the idea of a single world government, single currency and a government that has absolute control over every aspect of your life ?

 

[Nicodeamus]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/486266_439399402782217_1897900554_n.png

lol

 

[Nerfherder]

Can I ask you a question Ghoti, do you support globalisation, the idea of a single world government, single currency and a government that has absolute control over every aspect of your life ?

Now there is a jump of logic if I have ever seen one.


Globalization is not something to support or reject... its a phenomenon. You can either adapt or fail.
We are very close to a single world government anyway, we have been for a long time. Perhaps if we had a real one the smaller countries would have representation.
Logistically a single currency would be very hard to implement but our currencies are weighted against one currency so in reality we do have one.

Explain to me how a government would have the time and resources to control every aspect of my life?

 

[Fudzy]

Re: Shooting at Connecticut school. 27 dead including 18 children

Now there is a jump of logic if I have ever seen one.


Globalization is not something to support or reject... its a phenomenon. You can either adapt or fail.
We are very close to a single world government anyway, we have been for a long time. Perhaps if we had a real one the smaller countries would have representation.
Logistically a single currency would be very hard to implement but our currencies are weighted against one currency so in reality we do have one.

Explain to me how a government would have the time and resources to control every aspect of my life?

Yeah not sure if he thought that one through properly.

 

[STS]

bravo

 

[noxibox]

If the problem is being able to get a gun, then presumably these incidents have not just happened throughout US history, but were more common in the past when anyone could just buy a gun any time anywhere.

In an ideal world no person other than the police, army and secury should be allowed to own a gun, and there should be no reason to have one for self defense. The only guns allowed if we really have to, is hunting rifles.

That doesn't sound ideal at all. The police are certainly the last people I would trust with deadly weapons.

In SA, of all places we have the biggest concern for self defense, yet I dont know a single person who owns a gun, apart from one or two who own a hunting rifle. Yet many USA people argue for having guns for self defence. I saw articles stating 17 000 murders a year in USA of which 85% or whatever is gun related. Well in SA we have 20 000 murders a year and we have a fraction of the US population.

They argue for having them for self-defence here too. I'd hazard that it would also be true that many in the US can say they don't know a single person that owns a gun. In South Africa they've made getting a license difficult and drawn out. This may be due to incompetence, inadequate staff or a government conspiracy (as some like to believe). South Africa has plenty of illegal guns in circulation though, and it wouldn't be hard for that to remain the case even if personal gun ownership were illegal. I doubt the US could keep guns out of the hands of criminals or in fact anyone who really wanted one. They can't even manage this in the UK.

Realistically, owning a handgun wont really increase your chances of survival in a armed robbery because by the time you know what is going on you will already be shot at or dead. No one should be allowed to carry a weapon designed to kill. Too many people dont know how to use it and it is actually a frighteningly powerful thing to allow some average Joe to walk around with.

Training and regular re-testing should be mandatory, no doubt. And definitely many times a gun will do you no good. But that doesn't mean they're useless. The next step after banning guns is to start getting really silly, as has happened in the UK.

He could have built a bomb, but then you would need some knowledge and risk blowing up your own house. Also needs a fair amount of strategic planning.

It's really not that hard.

I still believe the media is to blame, not music or films but news, advertising and what is and what is not socially acceptable. A country using fear to sell products will have way too many psychopaths emerge form the underlying community all these corporations rely on. Due to the problem at hand I can actually say that they maybe should have a look at the 2nd amendment just to have some sort of control on firearms. Unfortunately people will find methods of killing but it might be a start?

What's quite curious is that quite often those opposed to gun regulation are themselves thoroughly opposed to personal freedom on most other fronts, authoritarian even.

The 2nd amendment has however not prevented gun regulation. It only stops an outright ban. Now many will argue that the original justification for the 2nd amendment makes no sense in the modern day, that there is no possible way the citizenry could take on the might of the state with force. But the effectiveness of numerous small, under-equipped armies proves this not to be the case. It also wrongly assumes the army and police to be entirely free of members who would side with the people to bring down the government. Realistically anyone really attempting to violently overthrow the US is unlikely of course, but since the real problem isn't guns there's not much point in outlawing them. And it wouldn't really make them unavailable.

 

[noxibox]

Explain to me how a government would have the time and resources to control every aspect of my life?

Western governments are trying their best to achieve this.

Globalization is not something to support or reject... its a phenomenon.

It has pros and cons, but it's not something I really understand being afraid of.

 

[BigBullBully]

Now there is a jump of logic if I have ever seen one.


Globalization is not something to support or reject... its a phenomenon. You can either adapt or fail.
We are very close to a single world government anyway, we have been for a long time. Perhaps if we had a real one the smaller countries would have representation.
Logistically a single currency would be very hard to implement but our currencies are weighted against one currency so in reality we do have one.

Explain to me how a government would have the time and resources to control every aspect of my life?

So you openly condone/accept the abolishment of sovereign nations, no more voting for our leaders, no more choice ? Centralism is the only way forward ? Btw I am not trying to argue for or against, I asked ghoti's opinion !

 

[BigBullBully]

Yeah not sure if he thought that one through properly.

I have, the question is have you ?

 

[Fudzy]

Re: Shooting at Connecticut school. 27 dead including 18 children

I have, the question is have you ?

I'm assuming your vague loaded questions had something to do with gun control, if that is the case then what about other laws that govern things like financial systems and transportation? Are you against those controls too?

 

[RanzB]

from the article

Notes: This table covers all the European nations for which the infor‐
mation given is available. As in Table 1, the homicide rate data comes
from an annually published report, CANADIAN CENTRE FOR JUSTICE
STATISTICS, HOMICIDE IN CANADA, JURISTAT.**

sounds more legit to me than some newspaper....

I don't know how much you make of this

http://www.wort.lu/en/view/luxembourg-saw-14-7-increase-in-crime-in-2011-4f706e20e4b0f18adeb486fa

Let me get this straight:

Are you defending the 9.01 number?

 

[Nerfherder]

So you openly condone/accept the abolishment of sovereign nations, no more voting for our leaders, no more choice ? Centralism is the only way forward ? Btw I am not trying to argue for or against, I asked ghoti's opinion !

I'm still wondering how you made the jump to that....

Anyway... a sovereign nation is an imaginary concept.

We have a democracy and vote in Jacob Zuma, he bows to our Chinese overlords. Everybody's some one elses n1$$er... no state is sovereign.
Event he US bows to Israel... Iran and North Korea then they are sovereign but they have all the nuclear power in the world aimed right at them if they step out of line.

Still have no idea what this has to do with Americans having the right to own as many guns as a small drug cartel.

 

[Nicodeamus]

globalization doesn't mean a single world government in any case, it will only imply that a borderless society is pointless. We have more states now than we had at the beginning of the last century. If anything self rule and self control is a more important phenomenon. That is self rule without isolationism.

 

[Stefanmuller]

If the problem is being able to get a gun, then presumably these incidents have not just happened throughout US history, but were more common in the past when anyone could just buy a gun any time anywhere.


That doesn't sound ideal at all. The police are certainly the last people I would trust with deadly weapons.


They argue for having them for self-defence here too. I'd hazard that it would also be true that many in the US can say they don't know a single person that owns a gun. In South Africa they've made getting a license difficult and drawn out. This may be due to incompetence, inadequate staff or a government conspiracy (as some like to believe). South Africa has plenty of illegal guns in circulation though, and it wouldn't be hard for that to remain the case even if personal gun ownership were illegal. I doubt the US could keep guns out of the hands of criminals or in fact anyone who really wanted one. They can't even manage this in the UK.


Training and regular re-testing should be mandatory, no doubt. And definitely many times a gun will do you no good. But that doesn't mean they're useless. The next step after banning guns is to start getting really silly, as has happened in the UK.


It's really not that hard.


What's quite curious is that quite often those opposed to gun regulation are themselves thoroughly opposed to personal freedom on most other fronts, authoritarian even.

The 2nd amendment has however not prevented gun regulation. It only stops an outright ban. Now many will argue that the original justification for the 2nd amendment makes no sense in the modern day, that there is no possible way the citizenry could take on the might of the state with force. But the effectiveness of numerous small, under-equipped armies proves this not to be the case. It also wrongly assumes the army and police to be entirely free of members who would side with the people to bring down the government. Realistically anyone really attempting to violently overthrow the US is unlikely of course, but since the real problem isn't guns there's not much point in outlawing them. And it wouldn't really make them unavailable.

The problem I have is the fact that some people think it is perfectly normal for me or anyone else to go and buy a gun, and take it with me anywhere I like. Or to have it lying around at home where, if I had kids, my kids can find it. So then people will tell you, but no, you should lock it away in a safe place, or store it unloaded - which renders the whole point of having a gun for self-defense completely useless. Hence my previous statement. If you are not sleeping with it loaded under your pillow, then it aint gonna help you a lot when someone bursts into your room at night trying to shoot you.

There should be no need at all for a normal citizen to have to own a gun for safety. If you feel you have to, then the police are not doing enough to look after your safety, and the government is failing against crime. There are other ways of ensuring your safety, such as alarms, burglar bars, or a simple slamlock gate in your passageway leading to the bedrooms. You can then go on and call the cops to come do their job. I have some understanding for people living and farms - they may need to arm themselves as they are specifically targeted and police protection is too far away.

I agree that banning guns will not remove the illegal fire-arms traded between criminals. But a lot of legally bought guns end up being stolen by criminals to become illegal firearms.

A bomb may not be rocket science, but a gun sure as hell is a lot easier - and you can aim at any target you like and you can get the satisfaction of a killing every time you shoot a next target. A bomb can still go wrong - not going off, going off at the wrong time or not doing enough damage/killing enough.