[quote='Dash Global' pid='80634' dateline='1313075772']
[quote]



Casual occurrences of shooting crimes? Most shootings are not casual imo.

Your point has some validity. There will be less gun offenses but that doesnt / won't change these facts.

1) Bad people can & will obtain guns no matter what gun laws are in place.

2) Being able to protect / defend yourself is in my opinion a BASIC life necessity that should be afforded to all law-abiding citizens.

3) Some evil people may not have a criminal record and could obtain a gun legally, but you can't condemn people on if's and maybes. Once someone abuses their freedoms and commits a violent crime they should be put away and dealt with.

I dont know about you but I would feel alot safer in the USA than the UK.

I would prob be dead if I lived in the UK. When I was 18 I encountered some crazed thug lunatics due to road rage and was blocked in and this dude and his friend rushed my car. Thank god I had a handgun in my vehicle which quickly made them quickly change their minds and retreat.

I havent encountered a home invasion yet, thank god and hope I dont. But best believe if I do I will have something for the mother fukers.

At the end of the day its all about being afforded the right to protect yourself and your family.

Outlawing guns is putting good law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage and higher risk.


[/quote]

This road rage, who instigated it?
It's funny but I lived in the U.K for many many years and I never saw any need to defend myself by pulling a gun.

And how do you know when to kill and when to just disarm? Who can trust a regular citizen to make the right choice?

Do you know what everyone in the UK said before I left? They said "I don't like North America, everyone has guns."

From how you sound, I wouldn't trust in your jurisdiction with the handgun.
What if some dude sounds off in your face while you are out on a quiet evening with your lizard. He touches her up and you lose your cool? You are strapped with a registered handgun. Wouldn't you pull it on that muthafcuka in retribution?

And what if your assailant has an Israeli machine gun? What type of arms would you feel entitled to have? A cannon? Where does it stop?

Don't you think the job of protection lies with your elected government?

Quote: (08-12-2011 02:20 PM)Moma Wrote:  

Don't you think the job of protection lies with your elected government?

Hilarious.

And governments have done such a wonderful job at this. Especially, when a disaster or riot strikes.....

Quote:Quote:

This road rage, who instigated it?
It's funny but I lived in the U.K for many many years and I never saw any need to defend myself by pulling a gun.

And how do you know when to kill and when to just disarm? Who can trust a regular citizen to make the right choice?

Do you know what everyone in the UK said before I left? They said "I don't like North America, everyone has guns."

From how you sound, I wouldn't trust in your jurisdiction with the handgun.
What if some dude sounds off in your face while you are out on a quiet evening with your lizard. He touches her up and you lose your cool? You are strapped with a registered handgun. Wouldn't you pull it on that muthafcuka in retribution?

And what if your assailant has an Israeli machine gun? What type of arms would you feel entitled to have? A cannon? Where does it stop?

Don't you think the job of protection lies with your elected government?

Consider yourself lucky. All it takes is one time and that could be the last.

The same way cops know when to kill and disarm. When you feel your life is in danger. After that the courts will decide....

You cant take away someones right to defend themselves on if's and maybe's. If you are a good law-abiding citizen with no criminal record you should be able to bear arms.

If I was out wit my grl and a dude started trouble and touched my girl we would be fighting. I would only pull my gun if I felt my life or gf's life was in danger ie he pulls a gun or knife out. Or he has 5 of his homies surround me and my girl. Like I said, at the end of the day the courts will decide if I was justified in shooting or killing someone.

The government can only protect you to a certain extent. There isnt police on every street corner. Their isnt police guarding your house. You dont get personal security for the average person.

Bottom line im safer in the USA than i am in the UK.

Someone breaks in my house with a gun in the UK im screwd.

If a gang of thugs corners me on the some back alley in the UK im screwd.

If someones decides to rob me in the UK im screwd.

In all those cases in America I can atleast know I will have proper means to protect myself and my family.

Quote: (08-12-2011 02:20 PM)Moma Wrote:  

It's funny but I lived in the U.K for many many years and I never saw any need to defend myself by pulling a gun.

And how do you know when to kill and when to just disarm? Who can trust a regular citizen to make the right choice?

Do you know what everyone in the UK said before I left? They said "I don't like North America, everyone has guns."

From how you sound, I wouldn't trust in your jurisdiction with the handgun.
What if some dude sounds off in your face while you are out on a quiet evening with your lizard. He touches her up and you lose your cool? You are strapped with a registered handgun. Wouldn't you pull it on that muthafcuka in retribution?

And what if your assailant has an Israeli machine gun? What type of arms would you feel entitled to have? A cannon? Where does it stop?

Don't you think the job of protection lies with your elected government?

To add to Dash and Moma's debate:

A common refrain the NRA (National Rifle Association) likes to repeat: "When seconds count, the police are always minutes away."

As an American, I dislike the idea of depending on others for my safety. If a criminal breaks into my house, I want the ability to defend myself now. If he doesn't want to get shot, he shouldn't break into my house.

Take your example of the assailant with the Israeli sub-machine gun (say an Uzi). If he goes around shooting people, he will kill many people if nobody else has guns (remember Norway?). If other people have guns, it is a matter of time before he gets shot by somebody.

If you give people the ability to defend themselves personally it makes them more involved in the upkeep of their community.

Consider the example of Charles Whitman who started shooting people indiscriminantly from a water tower:

Quote:Quote:

Around 20 minutes later, once Whitman began facing return fire from the authorities and armed civilians who had brought out their personal firearms to assist police, he used the waterspouts on each side of the tower as gun ports, allowing him to continue shooting largely protected from the gunfire below but also greatly limiting his range of targets. Ramiro Martinez, an officer who participated in stopping Whitman's rampage, later stated that the civilian shooters should be credited as they made it difficult for him to take careful aim.

He was taken down in part by civilian shooters who used their own personal weapons.

With all due respect, what your friends have to say is irrelevant. They don't live in America, how can they know what it's like and understand the American view point? You may dislike a person who possesses a gun but you will respect his rights and property.

"An armed society is a polite society."

Wald

Edit: Charles Whitman's parents got divorced. Go figure.

Quote:Quote:

In May 1966, Whitman's mother announced she was filing for a divorce and contacted Charles after several altercations with his father. Whitman drove to Florida to help his mother move to Austin, where she found work in a cafeteria. The move prompted his youngest brother, John, to leave Lake Worth as well, but his brother Patrick decided to continue living with their father and working for him at his plumbing supply business. Shortly after he moved to Austin, John was arrested for throwing a rock through a window but released after paying a $25 fine.[7]
Whitman's father began to telephone Whitman several times a week, pleading with him to convince his mother to return to Lake Worth, but he refused.

Good points Walder.

I dont see how anyone can ligitimatly argue that you dont have the right to defend yourself and family,

And that we should depend on the government to "help / defend" me from common criminals! lol

Sorry but ill worry about protecting me, my house and my family from everyday scumbags.

Now, i'll depend on the government protect me from other countries ect. You know, stuff that I cant possibly handle on my own.

They issued a 10 o clock curfew in Philly for 18 year olds and younger to try to curtail the flash mobs that have been there. They actually enforced it on some teens on south street.

the reason the riots got so out of hand in London is that the police has been forced to become PC by hiring women, minorities, and acting like they're everyone's friend. in many latin countries (Spain, Italy, Brazil) there tend to be different kinds of police: the kind there is in the UK that help tourists if they're lost and need directions, but also police that are more heavily trained and armed to deal with violent situations (political, terrorism or gang related).

Do you really think that if the UK had Spain's Guardia Civil in London these riots would have gone on for 4 nights. No, the first night several rioters would have been shot and the rest would be too afraid to try anything.

i love how you now get all these liberal types on TV saying these "youths feel disechanted/disenfranchised"; fucking hell, most of them are on benefits; the government gives them free housing and healthcare; what more do they want?? and then they complain they can't get a good job; of course they can't get a good job, even the ones that were born here barely speak english that normal people can understand.

it's funny how in the last few years with all the polish/eastern euro immigration to london a lot of the "lower" jobs have been taken up by these immigrants, e.g. working at starbucks, pret's; can you imagine ordering a latte from one of those thugs; "yeah, you tellz me whatz you like innit n dun be dissin me or iz shank ya"

ok, rant over, now let's get back to discussing chicks

Sorry if this was covered, I skimmed the thread

The original question was really big on my mind when all SHTF in London. As a young male who IS EMPLOYED and is barely scrapping by, I cant imagine how the unemployed/minimum wage makers feel.

I've heard population density cited as a reason why America has yet to see riots like those in the UK. UK and London are much more tightly packed, so it amplifies social problems. In America, the large cities are very dense, but the whole of the country is fairly spread out.

Also fear came up a lot. The 2nd amendment to be exact. While rioters with guns is a scary notion, I heard a lot of people mention that a large portion of the death toll in the Rodney King riots were shop and home owners defending their stake.

I read somewhere (forgive me for I have forgotten where exactly) that it its been said a country will go into riots when youth unemployment hits 26%, and that the US is currently at 24%

I'd rather people complain than go terrorize their local neighborhoods, stealing shit, and beating up random people for no reason.

Those London rioters are nothing but opportunistic thugs using a bad situation to their advantage so they can steal material shit made by the same corporations that they bitch about as being "bad, greedy, and bad for the environment", etc. Bunch of fucking stupid hypocrites they are.

I hope Americans would have the decency not to burn and loot their own neighborhoods.

To put all this disenfranchised/unemployed nonsense to rest, there are over 2200 VACANT paid apprenticeships in Greater London alone. Complaints about youth unemployment with statistics like that dont fly Im afraid.

Read that article, sums the situation up perfectly.

@kirk

Roosh is right, A riot like the one in London is a real possibility NYC(Manhattan island and the 4 boroughs). The seeds have already been planted we are just waiting for that tree to grow. I would have agreed with you but a lot things have changed in NYC since the Crown Heights and the Kiko Garcia(unarmed drug dealer shot by police) riots in Washington Heights(Upper Manhattan) Gentrification of large parts of Brooklyn and Queens have placed a sizable population of media savvy yuppies with their 2 million dollar brownstones,$600 strollers and $500K 500 Sqft condos within easy reach of the mobs. Therefore, the The mayor might do a tactical mistake and send all the cops he has to protect the yuppies in Park Slope, Carrol Gardens, Downtown Brooklyn and leave the crown jewel Manhattan unprotected. There are still quite a few "Projects" in lower Manhattan and midtown not all of them are in Harlem and the Heights. Also, there's enough high priced real state in Brooklyn less than 5 blocks from the "hood" "hood" to cause hundreds of millions in damage and destroy the political career whoever is the mayor at the time this goes down.

With regards to "60k armed men." There are only that many if they can all get to work, a large scale riot will turn all major highways and roads into parking lots. In addition, the most important arsenal in a police officer's tool box is not his gun, its his police radio. The agencies that you mentioned do not share the same frequency in their radios, this was actually a problem mentioned during 9/11 commissions. The report said that there was a the total breakdown of communication between and within agencies. As far as I am concerned the radio situation still hasn't been fixed. Also, can you imagined how 60K people sound like going over the radio? How about if the radio falls in the wrong hands and the rioters start jamming the transmissions by pressing the "talk" button? You'll be surprised how enterprising and knowledgeable of police procedure and methods guetto folk are.

Another problem is that the mayor of NYC has all but declared full war on the pay and benefits of all municipal workers including the police and fire department. New NYC Police officers and firemen are under a new pension tier where they don't get a disability pension if they get hurt while working and have to work 25 years instead of 20 to collect a lower pension. If you think an underpaid, demoralized under appreciated NYC cop is going to go out of his way to protect the property of the Bourgeoisie he feels butt fucked him with no lube, I have a bridge to sell you. I predict you going to see officers in full uniform doing the looting and walking around with cans full of gas. NYC had a little taste of worker apathy last blizzard when the Sanitation department took their sweet time plowing the streets and basically shut down the city for two days. I believe 4 people died because the ambulances were stuck on the snow.

The police will not be able to stop a multi neighborhood and multi borough riot in NYC, they just don't have the bodies and resources to do so. Actually, they will only make matters worse because the little resources are going to be wasted rescuing officers who get attacked by the mobs. I don't think a gun is going to help you at all, its going to make things worse. Its very easy to shoot at a target from 15ft away that isn't moving and isn't shooting back. Let's see how accurate you going to be with adrenaline pumping, dozens of wild animals surrounding you throwing bricks and trying to set you on fire. The riot is probably going to go on as long as it takes for the National Guard, Army and Marines to arrive to shut the whole thing down.

Chances nothing is going to happen as long as the Govt cheese keeps flowing to placate and bride the poor masses in NYC. The moment the State of New York runs out of money to pay for the plethora of govt assistance programs its going to be "Hammer Time." The average New Yorker, and American for that matter has no idea that the emperor really has no clothes.

People need start rioting in California ASAP. I mean just look at how many people don't have a job over there, it sucks!

people need to man up and take control of their life and stop bitching.

no matter how bad you got it, there is some one that has it worse.

It's all being kept a float by government aid programs.

When these aid programs start to get cut (aka austerity), or when the checks just don't buy enough to get by because of the high inflation you're going to start to see protests. As inflation ramps up you're going to see demands for more government assistance, and bigger checks.

Soon after that, the protests will turn to riots.

I think we have another two years (3 max) before you start to see the first real riots. Inflation is bad, but it will need to get a bit worse... I think a good sign would be 10 Dollar Gas prices

Quote: (08-14-2011 01:19 PM)bengalltigerr Wrote:  

People need start rioting in California ASAP. I mean just look at how many people don't have a job over there, it sucks!

Unemployment in IT industry in California is around 2% or so. A whole Silicon Valley is hiring like crazy. My friends are actually changing jobs.

Quote: (08-14-2011 01:24 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

people need to man up and take control of their life and stop bitching.

no matter how bad you got it, there is some one that has it worse.

Yeah that's right. I keep a pistol in my car when driving and bring it inside my crib when I get home. You're a fool if you think the cops will be there in lightning speed when some shit hits the fan. I can understand not being a fan of owning a gun but ill never understand people acting like gun owners are wrong. I'd be worried if guns were outlawed here because...
- Criminals would know most people don't have anything to defend themselves. Why not commit a crime if the risk is much lower?
- It's not hard to get a throwaway pistol. It's easier than getting a fucking license. I can make some phone calls and have one within a couple of hours if I wanted to.


Moma - you can't just get a license, shoot someone who pissed you off and get out of jail the next day lol. You're going to jail as soon as the cops show up and unless you can prove your life was in danger, youll go to prison.

Quote: (08-15-2011 04:47 AM)houston Wrote:  

I can understand not being a fan of owning a gun but ill never understand people acting like gun owners are wrong. I'd be worried if guns were outlawed here because...

I've been through numerous gun debates, both in Internet and IRL. Unfortunately, same as with religion, drugs and politics, vast majority of people participating in those debates have no personal opinion about the things they discuss. Their opinions did not come from analyzing the facts and making conclusions, they came from reading the propaganda and ignoring all the counter-evidence. This, of course, makes the discussion with them completely useless.

However in your case I'd like to point out to the following statistics:

1. I live in California, which has the most restrictive gun laws in the USA (for example, it is almost impossible to get a CCW permit here). You live in Texas, which has probably the most permissive gun laws in the USA. Both are populous states. A typical point raised by pro-gun crowd is "guns prevent violent crime", usually followed by some examples or personal testimonies. So you probably expect all the violent criminals from the USA to move to California to commit their crimes against the disarmed population. Well, the violent crime rate (per capita) in Texas is significantly higher than in California; Texas rate is 1.32 (above) national average, California is 0.92 (below).

2. The homicide rate in "gunless" UK is three times lower comparing to the USA (1.28 vs 5.0)

3. The UK Home Office reports that the gun-related crime went up right after the gun ban went into effect (which is obvious as some actions which were legal before became illegal), but the trend is down. Which matches the historic experience from gun ban implementations in Europe following WWII. I don't think the USA would be different.

Hope this will help you understand why some people are "acting like gun owners are wrong".

Quote: (08-15-2011 11:23 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

Quote: (08-15-2011 04:47 AM)houston Wrote:  

I can understand not being a fan of owning a gun but ill never understand people acting like gun owners are wrong. I'd be worried if guns were outlawed here because...

I've been through numerous gun debates, both in Internet and IRL. Unfortunately, same as with religion, drugs and politics, vast majority of people participating in those debates have no personal opinion about the things they discuss. Their opinions did not come from analyzing the facts and making conclusions, they came from reading the propaganda and ignoring all the counter-evidence. This, of course, makes the discussion with them completely useless.

However in your case I'd like to point out to the following statistics:

1. I live in California, which has the most restrictive gun laws in the USA (for example, it is almost impossible to get a CCW permit here). You live in Texas, which has probably the most permissive gun laws in the USA. Both are populous states. A typical point raised by pro-gun crowd is "guns prevent violent crime", usually followed by some examples or personal testimonies. So you probably expect all the violent criminals from the USA to move to California to commit their crimes against the disarmed population. Well, the violent crime rate (per capita) in Texas is significantly higher than in California; Texas rate is 1.32 (above) national average, California is 0.92 (below).

2. The homicide rate in "gunless" UK is three times lower comparing to the USA (1.28 vs 5.0)

3. The UK Home Office reports that the gun-related crime went up right after the gun ban went into effect (which is obvious as some actions which were legal before became illegal), but the trend is down. Which matches the historic experience from gun ban implementations in Europe following WWII. I don't think the USA would be different.

Hope this will help you understand why some people are "acting like gun owners are wrong".

Nothing is gonna prevent "violent" crimes. There will always be people that will break they law and commit acts of violence. In my opinion we should just kill these people and atleast cut into their numbers lol Harsh I know... lol

Nothing is gonna prevent people that want a gun to get one.

The only real argument that pro gun people have (and its a big one) is that they are safer having a gun. They atleast will have a chance in the event some idiot attacks them or their family. There is really no way anyone can refute this.

Comparing Europe and USA is not a good idea due to the cheer number of minorities living in our country, in particular blacks & hispanics. Most killings are committed in run down areas that are generally populated with minorities.

Sure there will be a slight drop in gun related crime, but the fact still stands being able to protect yourself and your family is a live necessity.

Unless you can guarantee that criminals can not and will not have guns you are putting innocent people at risk. Which is an impossible task. Criminals will find ways to get a gun if they want one.

Quote: (08-16-2011 12:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

Nothing is gonna prevent "violent" crimes. There will always be people that will break they law and commit acts of violence. In my opinion we should just kill these people and atleast cut into their numbers lol Harsh I know... lol

Nothing is gonna prevent people that want a gun to get one.

The only real argument that pro gun people have (and its a big one) is that they are safer having a gun. They atleast will have a chance in the event some idiot attacks them or their family. There is really no way anyone can refute this.

Comparing Europe and USA is not a good idea due to the cheer number of minorities living in our country, in particular blacks & hispanics. Most killings are committed in run down areas that are generally populated with minorities.

Sure there will be a slight drop in gun related crime, but the fact still stands being able to protect yourself and your family is a live necessity.

Unless you can guarantee that criminals can not and will not have guns you are putting innocent people at risk. Which is an impossible task. Criminals will find ways to get a gun if they want one.

What does that mean? There are lots of minorities in the UK too. In London, where I grew up, it's swarming with minorities. Lots of blacks, South East Asians (fcuk it, in UK we name it Asians), Asians and so on.

America is not a unique situation. People are people. It's all about the mentality. I knew a few rough individuals in the U.K with shanks, Stanley knives or even their mum's kitchen knife. These perps were ready to use their blades, the same way your American hoodlums are ready to pull and pop.

With guns being legal, there would consequently be a lot more circulating in the market place. This would result in them being much more readily available in the hands of a seasoned criminal, a wannabe thug or an angry citizen who decides to take the law into their own hands.

Do you know how many stabbings occur in the U.K? When things are presented without a means to get them, you create resentment.

UK mans are just as violent.

The only differences between the countries is the technology available to carry out the intent. In some places, peeps will brick or bottle a person in the name of robbery or just street cred.
In the US because the wide proliferation of guns, it's easier to just cap a mans instead.
You talk about people's right to protect themselves, do you not think that the inhabitants of the U.K don't feel that need also?
How do you suppose a citizen protects himself against a snarling shav who demands his mobile phone under the threat of getting shanked?
Should the citizen also carry a shank with him?

Criminals in the UK can also access guns. So why doesn't the average U.K resident feel the same need to arm himself as an American? Is it brain washing on the part of the British?
As old nemesis aptly mentioned, stats in homicide go up with the ready availability of lethal weapons.
You cannot trust a person's judgement to use a weapon.
Humans can be irrational. Men of power make bigger mistakes because they have a bigger capacity for destruction.
They should allow all weapons and just legalise boxing gloves lolll..

However, I speak from an idealistic viewpoint. Realistically, if I was strapped, I might fill a clown with some hot ones just over some money he/she owes me but that doesn't necessarily make it right.

Check this site for the Brits capacity for homicide.

What is means there is atleast 5 times the minorities in the US than the UK. So using sheer numbers is misleading.

I would assume you would need a shank or gun or some weapon to defend yourself from someone using a knife. Hands alone will not cut it lol

I can not explain the mentality of Europe and how it is so pacifist.

All I know is I am safer in the US than I am in the Uk. I always have a gun either on me or within a short distance ready for any crazy mutherfucker that thinks he is gonna rob me, or harm me.

Quote: (08-16-2011 01:54 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

What is means is there is atleast 5 times the minorities in the US than the UK.

I would assume you would need a shank or gun or some weapon to defend yourself from someone using a knife. Hands alone will not cut lol

There are also more 'majorities' in the US than the UK so the amount of minorities balances out.

What percentage of the total US population are minorities? Do they count white hispanics as minorities too or just the swarthy ones?

Since a lot of us on this forum lean towards the nerdier side of the spectrum, and love travel and adventure, I am surprised nobody has brought up how tedious and monotonous modern life is in general. I only briefly visited the UK as a child and after university, but London seemed a lot like New York, and English culture wasn't all that different from the US once you strip away a few regional idiosyncracies.

Sure, the welfare state and breakdown of the family is part of it. But what gives anyone meaning to their lives anymore? People with brains and hobbies, who were raised by good parents take this sort of thing for granted, but if you are not so smart, and raised in a constant media bubble of the internet and cable TV, and don't know how to keep yourself occupied or concentrate long enough to accomplish anything, and indeed are not taught how to do so, you're going to have bored people lashing out with very little moral conscience. This is not just a matter of socialist governments giving out goodies...after all, want does the free market want besides large amounts of passive, docile consumers?

http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/71/gen...fcked.html

Kids today are hovered over and constantly under surveillance. The wealthier ones seem to have no unplanned activity time anymore, the poorer ones have their lockers searched by cops and security cameras watching them. The vast majority of information can be googled instantly. People work at mostly boring jobs that give little sense of accomplishment, and people get into debt buying baubles and trinkets, trapping them in that boring job. Of course, we all know how marriage and relationships are turning out these days. There's a general lack of satisfaction and warmth in the air, the sense that we are killing time waiting for some grand event that never comes.

http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2011/01/1...-is-wrong/

The tea party is describing a piece of the puzzle, as are hard core politically correct left-wingers. But its beyond politics. Even people with money in the US seem drained, not really enjoying themselves. The first article I linked to calls it "British disease". It's hard to quantify though. Is it our hyperindividual culture? The emphasis on material wealth? The relative lack of importance given to family? The lack of shared traditions, communities, and religious morality?

A taste of the first article:

"According to the Unicef report, which measured 40 indicators of quality of life – including the strength of relationships with friends and family, educational achievements and personal aspirations, and exposure to drinking, drug taking and other risky behavior – British children have the most miserable upbringing in the developed world. American children come next, second from the bottom.

The report confirmed many people’s suspicions about the “British disease,” in the process raising doubts about the Anglo-American model of progress in general. As the older but also weaker partner, Britain may well serve to warn a host of nations following closely behind on its path. While an aging, ever more crowded Europe looks on anxiously at the stress behavior currently being exhibited by its own dysfunctional young – be it Parisian car barbecues or riots in Denmark and Germany – our continental cousins can’t help but notice that many of these behaviors debuted in Anglo-American cultures. The report explicitly demonstrated that, at least on this side of the Atlantic, the British are trailblazers of generational instability and social deterioration. On the whole, British children were more disconnected from their families, with nearly half of 15-year-old boys spending most nights out with friends, compared to just 17 percent of their French counterparts. Forty percent of UK youth had sex before age 15, compared with 15 percent of Polish teens. They drank nearly four times as much as the Italians, and, perhaps most saliently, had the lowest sense of subjective well-being among all the youth surveyed."

Quote: (08-16-2011 12:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

Nothing is gonna prevent "violent" crimes. There will always be people that will break they law and commit acts of violence.

I fail to see how it addresses any of the facts above.

Quote:Quote:

Nothing is gonna prevent people that want a gun to get one.

Not true. The reason why there is relatively little gun crime in Russia is because the penalty for carrying a gun is very harsh, and actually exceeds the penalty for most nonviolent crimes. So for a pickpocketer or petty thief it makes absolutely no sense to carry a gun - instead of getting two year probation he'd get five years in prison.

Quote:Quote:

The only real argument that pro gun people have (and its a big one) is that they are safer having a gun. They atleast will have a chance in the event some idiot attacks them or their family. There is really no way anyone can refute this.

Well, the facts above clearly show this is NOT the case, so those people live in illusion.

Quote:Quote:

Comparing Europe and USA is not a good idea due to the cheer number of minorities living in our country, in particular blacks & hispanics.

I don't buy it, but even if this was the case, what about comparing California and Texas? We have quite a lot of hispanics here as well.

Quote:Quote:

Sure there will be a slight drop in gun related crime, but the fact still stands being able to protect yourself and your family is a live necessity.

Are you sure about that? How many times have you personally used a gun to protect yourself and your family? Personally I've never had one and don't even feel the need to have one.

Quote:Quote:

Unless you can guarantee that criminals can not and will not have guns you are putting innocent people at risk. Which is an impossible task. Criminals will find ways to get a gun if they want one.

This is a typical NRA propaganda speech. Sorry, you're out.

Quote: (08-16-2011 01:54 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

All I know is I am safer in the US than I am in the Uk.

The statistics is pretty clear that you are three times LESS safe in US than you'd be in UK.
When a Brit teenager gets crazy, he gets a knife and kills maybe a couple of people before he is subdued.
When an American teenager gets crazy, he gets a bunch of guns, goes to University and kills 30+ people.
Too bad most gun owners let the NRA (who is actually representing the interest of gun manufacturers) to do all the thinking for them.

Oldnemesis,

Someone breaks into my house with a gun. In the UK im screwd.

I get cornered by 5 thugs in the UK. Im screwd

Someone gets mad at me for talking to their bitch and decides to cut or shoot me in the UK. Im screwd

Im sorry brah, but I aint relying on the government or police to protect me. Or some idiot to show me mercy and only punch or cut me. lol

Most murders are not random. They are targeted and most of the time the people know each other. I like my chances better with a piece than without.....