Vsicks Pathy Posted July 25, 2007 Author Share Posted July 25, 2007 oh, and i am a little surprised that none mentioned the part about super power so i will just throw that out there for ya'll. hehe :D China? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkpath96 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Low crime countries have a low crime culture. I am just trying to make sense of your weapons culture. It seems to be a "blaze away" culture, and from the very top (shock and awe) down. It is encouraged. The NRA encourages it?? As a future parent, and a high school teacher, I am also shocked at some things our country does or allows - and I am sometimes downright scared about raising kids in today's society. My wife and I rarely ever watch movies anymore (or TV for that matter, except Man vs. Wild and Dirty Jobs!) because everything is about crime, war, death and destruction, sex, drugs, murder, you name it. I grew up with the Dukes of Hazard and The Cosby Show - kids today are growing up with CSI, The Sopranos, Desperate Housewives, etc. The media surely does not care about social impact - they are after the all important dollar, because this stuff sells. But they are so going down the wrong path. Has anyone ever read the book "Running Man"? It's about a society that takes reality to extremes - killing for entertainment, just like the days of the gladiators. So far, our media are paralleling this trend all too closely. All of this violence in our culture, whether it be TV, movies, music, or games, DOES have an impact. And what is being done about it? As far as I can tell, absolutely nothing. Sure, it is entertaining to some; and yes, I play Ghost Recon and Battlefield2, and do enjoy a good action flick here and there - but that's only because I know they are fictional. There's so much of it out there that I wonder if some kids don't know what is fictional and what is reality. My point is - I was raised by real, caring, and responsible adult parents. My children will be raised the same way. If this were the case for everyone (and being a teacher I know it is FAR from it), we would be a much more peaceful, respectable, and democratic society rather than the war-mongering, fear-mongering, crime-ridden one we are today. And now we are stuck with very few options and poor voter turnout as ways of changing the way our country is run. As to how this relates to gun control... it's all about respect. Respect for the gun, respect for the law, and respect for one another. This has to be learned at an early age, and drilled into the youth of America, so we can stop violence. If you respect guns, you shouldn't have to take them away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoohaa Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 ^^^ do you do your own surgeries? how about putting out your own house fire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostPath Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 ^^^ do you do your own surgeries? how about putting out your own house fire? If you really think calling 911 will get you a policeman in time, you're smoking something. Here's just one example: http://cbs11tv.com/local/local_story_204224936.html "In Cardenas' case, police took 2 hours and 17 minutes to respond to a call. " "For Chad and Brooke Lindsey, it took 4 hours for police to respond." Oh, and per the US Supreme Court, the police actually have NO legal requirement to actually come out when you call 911. Think about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 (edited) reading the above, i may be misunderstood, but some posts partly indicate that so many americans have guns because they "live in fear". I disagree. Yes, i believe every rich mofo with a $5 million dollar house has a few guns stashed around ... but i have always had guns. i enjoy a nice day at the shooting range to pop off a few clips, and i also used to frequent a friends large, remote property in the woods up north where we would target/game shoot. I also shot game in England. guns to me are 99% recreational. (i fear i am part of the minority here) however, around here in CA, i would say the ratio of "unlawful guns" to "lawfully held" guns is about 2/1 ... laws are getting stricter, but, unfortunately, the illegal guns are already out there. These are the guns that need to be retrieved. I know in our county, we have annual "weapons surrender" week, where anyone can drop off illegal weapons, of any kind, with no questions asked. In the past couple of years, i noticed more illegal guns/weapons were being turned in. I wish this was conducted more often than 2 times a year. Funny, I have never actually kept my gun in an accessible place in case of robbery in my house.. i have other "things" stashed around my house for protection. I figure, if the burglar can overpower me, then my own gun COULD be used against me.... and i'm sorry, i will NOT allow that to happen.(1 death, and 1 more illegal gun on the streets) I can more than likely survive being stabbed or hit with a bat, a bullet at point blank however, is sure to cause my demise. illegal guns will always be out there, en mass, but it's the hands that hold these guns that i do not trust. *runs off to hide now* Edited July 26, 2007 by Slick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted July 26, 2007 Author Share Posted July 26, 2007 reading the above, i may be misunderstood, but some posts partly indicate that so many americans have guns because they "live in fear". I disagree. Yes, i believe every rich mofo with a $5 million dollar house has a few guns stashed around ... but i have always had guns. i enjoy a nice day at the shooting range to pop off a few clips, and i also used to frequent a friends large, remote property in the woods up north where we would target/game shoot. I also shot game in England. guns to me are 99% recreational. (i fear i am part of the minority here)however, around here in CA, i would say the ratio of "unlawful guns" to "lawfully held" guns is about 2/1 ... laws are getting stricter, but, unfortunately, the illegal guns are already out there. These are the guns that need to be retrieved. I know in our county, we have annual "weapons surrender" week, where anyone can drop off illegal weapons, of any kind, with no questions asked. In the past couple of years, i noticed more illegal guns/weapons were being turned in. I wish this was conducted more often than 2 times a year. Funny, I have never actually kept my gun in an accessible place in case of robbery in my house.. i have other "things" stashed around my house for protection. I figure, if the burglar can overpower me, then my own gun COULD be used against me.... and i'm sorry, i will NOT allow that to happen.(1 death, and 1 more illegal gun on the streets) I can more than likely survive being stabbed or hit with a bat, a bullet at point blank however, is sure to cause my demise. illegal guns will always be out there, en mass, but it's the hands that hold these guns that i do not trust. *runs off to hide now* Come out from your hiding spot Slick. That was very well orated. I especially liked your maturity and ability to think logically about your own weapon and the very real possibility that it may be used on you. The living in fear comment was made by me in the first instance. I was referring to numerous replies that were in the VT thread that eluded to fear being a factor for having a gun. Even in this thread here, it is more than evident that fear, even paranoia, plays a real role in the gun debate. Fear mongering is the only hand some people can play. So they push it for all its worth. Facts and figures mean nothing at all to this side of the argument. It is ugly, unfounded and even embarrassing but is is a part of the debate. As happened here with gun control, the criminals kept them. They go on a rampage every now and then killing each other. The cops pick up and destroy their guns and the coroner picks up their bodies.. I think that's a pretty good way of killing two birds with the one stone. Illegal gun crime, to 2003, only accounts for 16% of gun crime. The other 84% is carried out by legal guns. Food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted July 26, 2007 Author Share Posted July 26, 2007 As a future parent, and a high school teacher, I am also shocked at some things our country does or allows - and I am sometimes downright scared about raising kids in today's society. My wife and I rarely ever watch movies anymore (or TV for that matter, except Man vs. Wild and Dirty Jobs!) because everything is about crime, war, death and destruction, sex, drugs, murder, you name it. I grew up with the Dukes of Hazard and The Cosby Show - kids today are growing up with CSI, The Sopranos, Desperate Housewives, etc. The media surely does not care about social impact - they are after the all important dollar, because this stuff sells. But they are so going down the wrong path. Has anyone ever read the book "Running Man"? It's about a society that takes reality to extremes - killing for entertainment, just like the days of the gladiators. So far, our media are paralleling this trend all too closely. All of this violence in our culture, whether it be TV, movies, music, or games, DOES have an impact. And what is being done about it? As far as I can tell, absolutely nothing. Sure, it is entertaining to some; and yes, I play Ghost Recon and Battlefield2, and do enjoy a good action flick here and there - but that's only because I know they are fictional. There's so much of it out there that I wonder if some kids don't know what is fictional and what is reality. My point is - I was raised by real, caring, and responsible adult parents. My children will be raised the same way. If this were the case for everyone (and being a teacher I know it is FAR from it), we would be a much more peaceful, respectable, and democratic society rather than the war-mongering, fear-mongering, crime-ridden one we are today. And now we are stuck with very few options and poor voter turnout as ways of changing the way our country is run. As to how this relates to gun control... it's all about respect. Respect for the gun, respect for the law, and respect for one another. This has to be learned at an early age, and drilled into the youth of America, so we can stop violence. If you respect guns, you shouldn't have to take them away. I agree with 99% of what you said. We are certainly desensitised about violence in this couldn't care less, I'm alright, bugger you Jack world. Being a teacher, you are in the front row when it comes to assessing how parenting skills, or lack there of, are reflected upon their children. I don't know how it is in the US but I can tell you how it is here.... Parents have NO RIGHTS when it comes to their children. If I pissfarted about when I was young, I got a foot up the arse. It was that simple.. That foot could have come from my teacher, my neighbour, the local shop owner or a complete stranger. It certainly gave you boundaries and a healthy respect for those around you. If you even look at you kids funny nowadays they can have the cops on you in a heart beat. Boundaries..... not anymore... Respect for others... pick a window. Being so politically correct has meant that our youth of today... I just shuddered... have no idea. It's just ME ME ME and I want! What's worse is that todays youth are tomorrows leaders. Respect for guns?? How about taking them away and when your respect for others and your behaviour has been proven, then, and only then, may you have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted July 26, 2007 Author Share Posted July 26, 2007 (edited) If you really think calling 911 will get you a policeman in time, you're smoking something. Here's just one example: http://cbs11tv.com/local/local_story_204224936.html "In Cardenas' case, police took 2 hours and 17 minutes to respond to a call. " "For Chad and Brooke Lindsey, it took 4 hours for police to respond." Oh, and per the US Supreme Court, the police actually have NO legal requirement to actually come out when you call 911. Think about that. I hope others bothered to actually read the link.... It is about response times to non emergency calls. Not life threatening situations as would be implied. And of those..... only 7% of response times are slow. A direct quote..... "A call from an alarm company is considered a priority three, so it's often held until the other calls are answered." It's fair to surmise that the real emergencies are responded to immediately. Edited July 26, 2007 by Vsicks Pathy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostPath Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 I hope others bothered to actually read the link.... It is about response times to non emergency calls. Not life threatening situations as would be implied. And of those..... only 7% of response times are slow. A direct quote..... "A call from an alarm company is considered a priority three, so it's often held until the other calls are answered." It's fair to surmise that the real emergencies are responded to immediately. One problem is that that is not the case - "non-life threatening" calls have turned out to be otherwise (see the CT home invasion robbery of two days ago). Another problem with this idea is that I've been in shooting incidents in Dallas. The police took 15 minutes to get to me each time. Non-emergency? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted July 26, 2007 Author Share Posted July 26, 2007 One problem is that that is not the case - "non-life threatening" calls have turned out to be otherwise (see the CT home invasion robbery of two days ago). Another problem with this idea is that I've been in shooting incidents in Dallas. The police took 15 minutes to get to me each time. Non-emergency? I think not. Please don't be offended if I no longer reply to your posts. It is not that I don't like you.. I just don't find anything you put forward credible. A little too much crying wolf. Cheers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostPath Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Please don't be offended if I no longer reply to your posts. It is not that I don't like you.. I just don't find anything you put forward credible. A little too much crying wolf. Cheers... That's OK. I was going to post redacted copies of the police reports, but if you don't want to play any more, I understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Come out from your hiding spot Slick. That was very well orated. I especially liked your maturity and ability to think logically about your own weapon and the very real possibility that it may be used on you. The living in fear comment was made by me in the first instance. I was referring to numerous replies that were in the VT thread that eluded to fear being a factor for having a gun. Even in this thread here, it is more than evident that fear, even paranoia, plays a real role in the gun debate. Fear mongering is the only hand some people can play. So they push it for all its worth. Facts and figures mean nothing at all to this side of the argument. It is ugly, unfounded and even embarrassing but is is a part of the debate. As happened here with gun control, the criminals kept them. They go on a rampage every now and then killing each other. The cops pick up and destroy their guns and the coroner picks up their bodies.. I think that's a pretty good way of killing two birds with the one stone. Illegal gun crime, to 2003, only accounts for 16% of gun crime. The other 84% is carried out by legal guns. Food for thought. *comes out of hiding* oh, i am 100% sure a guy 6'2" tall and 250lbs could easily overpower me for my gun.... and i am sorry, but half awake, even with infra red on a dark, moving target is NOT good odds in my book, so i prefer a few "weapons of choice" that are effective, yet probably will not cost me my life, should they be taken away and used against me. and yes, i agree that most "legal" guns ARE used in the majority (of high profile/reported) killings.. i read all the time about the husband who got pissed off at his ex wife, after seeing her with her new bf, and so he shoots her.... SENSELESS, and it is the SENSELESS killings i just can not grasp. I have no problem with reading one gang member shot another, good for them, i wish they'd BOTH died. still senseless, but worthy of it. I work in a "high profile/robbery inviting" enviroment (u Haul), and i have had a couple nights where they people who were there just before closing had every intention of robbing me.... i got lucky, by sheer chance that nothing came to a head either time. scary none the less. i would have LOVED to have my gun by my side, but again, it could "backfire" on me... (ever tried to shoot a crackhead running around at 50mph?)..... and now, i forgot the point of this post. lol...... *pats self on back* good for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabe Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Okay I am starting to see a pattern and please don't take this the wrong way. The trend I am seeing, is that everybody is scared of intruders who are armed. Why are these intruders armed with Guns? The intruders are caring the firearms because they think the Householder is armed and they then go in a even higher state of anticipation. If the robber has a higher state of anticipation he / she will react in a more hostile manner. Violence begets Violence. For a Christan nation, America sure needs to read the bible a little more. Imagine a world where robbers were put at ease, they would react in a more thoughtful and concise manner. I love my true freedom here in Australia. I can walk down the street unarmed and unafraid. I don't need to worry about a crook pulling a gun out at me*. They know that the chances of finding someone ready to shoot back very low and don't need to use anything bigger than a knife.. I was a manager in a Large American Fast food chain who worked late at night in rather UN-desirable area's. In that time, I was held up on four occasions. The worst I ever saw was a small knife and a meat cleaver. They all knew that I didn't have a gun under counter. All four were caught and the worst I got was 2 @!*%ches from when the police officer cut the tape from my wrist in my "retirement" robbery. I'm still here and the most any of them got was $240. They got their hit or Blew it gambling. Yes, there are fruit loops out there and nothing anybody can do will stop them. Do what we did, Buy back the guns! The Australian Government bought back over a million semi-automatic center firing rifles. Crooks need money and every gun handed in is one less potential "home invasion" on the street, buy them a "hit" with the proceeds. Cheaper in the long run. Hopefully they OD!. Why are there so many "illegal" firearms? Because 90% of them started life as a legal homeowners "protection". Most of them would have sat in a bedside drawer till someone broke in and found it and thought "I can sell this". Break the chain. If your not 'using' it lock it up where others can't get them. How many kids get killed each year "playing" with mommy's protection. Get rid of the Death Penalty. Lower the stakes, less cops would get shot and more crooks would surrender kn owning that they wouldn't get killed anyway. It would be a worse life locked up 23 hours a day, with no chance of parole, no hope, no outside contact, and not being able to kill themselves. Send them to a living hell! with NO out. Send them nuts, Easier to deal with at least. Persona nongratia. Wannabe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabe Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 (ever tried to shoot a crackhead running around at 50mph?)..... and now, i forgot the point of this post. lol...... *pats self on back* good for me That would be murder.. The crack head is'nt threating you when he's running around at 50MPH.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoohaa Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted July 27, 2007 Author Share Posted July 27, 2007 (edited) Like I said earlier... Gun control is much like speed limits or devices that control the way traffic behaves. It doesn't stop you from driving a car and gun control doesn't stop you from having a gun. If a stretch of road has an exceptional amount of road trauma, it is scrutinised and recommendations are put forward followed by devices set to curb that trauma. It might be a simple reduction in speed limits on that particular stretch of road... It could be a set of traffic lights. Whatever the resolution, something has been done. If nothing was done to curb the carnage, there would be outrage, and rightfully so. You wouldn't funnel even more vehicles onto the dangerous stretch of road would you? Some people here would suggest that an unsupervised school crossing would solve the problem. The argument would be that there are little kids so people would drive differently. When the first lot of little kiddies get mowed down, they'd simply suggest more unsupervised crossings. Why? for the same reason they suggested it in the first place. Surely you wouldn't tolerate such stupidity would you? Why then is there no outrage about gun trauma? I don't know.. does this not make any sense at all to anyone? Is the analogy I draw too simple? So far not one skerrick of evidence has been put forward that proves your gun laws are reasonable or responsible in their current form. We can agree that not a single measure has been put in place to try and curb gun trauma either. On the other hand, taking the VT thread into account, plenty of factual evidence supporting gun control and the positive outcomes that follow implementation has been put forward. I have asked the questions. I have not had one answered. As usual! Edited July 27, 2007 by Vsicks Pathy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoohaa Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 pretty funny how some are brain washed into a certain line of thinking. hmm.. ^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoohaa Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 So far not one skerrick of evidence has been put forward that proves your gun laws are reasonable or responsible in their current form. We can agree that not a single measure has been put in place to try and curb gun trauma either. On the other hand, taking the VT thread into account, plenty of factual evidence supporting gun control and the positive outcomes that follow implementation has been put forward. I have asked the questions. I have not had one answered. As usual! Why don't you demonstrate for us how our gun laws are not "reasonable or responsible" in their current form? And no, I absolutely do not agree that "not a single measure has been put in place to try and curb gun trauma either". I have no idea where you got this from, but there are and have been MANY laws which attempt to "curb gun trauma". You must not be at all familiar with American gun laws. If you want to criticize our country, our Constitution, and our laws, PLEASE make yourself familiar with them! I've seen more than one comment that illustrate how ignorant you and other Australians are of our legal system and our Bill of Rights. The VT thread did not include a shred of "factual evidence supporting gun control and the positive outcomes that follow implementation". There were plenty of news stories about "poor little johnny who got shot accidentally by a big mean gun", but there were actually several links which called to attention the faulty logic and statistics often used to support gun control. Perhaps we read different "VT threads", but the one I read contained link after link to CREDIBLE internet sites which disproved or seriously called into question the claim that strict gun control leads to fewer deaths. I don't know if you missed it, but there was one link to a very well written, neutral, and well referenced comparison of the gun laws of Japan, Canada, and the United States which concluded that strict gun laws did not correlate to fewer deaths. Please, Vee Sicks, lay out your arguments in a clear and concise way. Please don't just post a list of links to news stories about people accidentally shooting themselves or others. Let's talk about the claim that positive outcomes follow the implementation of gun control. I'd love to hear your explanations of how the citizens of Israel and Switzerland have such free access and even compulsory ownership of firearms, yet they have low crime rates, while countries like South Africa have extremely strict gun control laws, yet they lead the world in murders per capita. I also want to respond to your claim that "children" are dying by the hordes due to gun accidents. You have not provided evidence for this claim. Please lay it out there. And no, citing a number of news stories about gun accidents is not providing evidence. **HINT** Before you even link to some anti-gun site, please be sure to disclose what they mean by "children". Anti-gun advocates often include youths up to 20 years old in the "children" category, so gang shootings are included in the statistics, skewing the data beyond all recognition. Unfortunately there is much of this sort of meddling with data when debating gun control, so we will need to carefully review the statistics that I hope you can share with us proving your points . I'm sorry to do this, but I really think the burden of proof should fall on your shoulders, since you initiated this debate with very open criticisms of the anti-gun control position. Don't expect me to spend hours laying out my responses and citing references when you have not done the same. Your arguments have not been well supported with credible evidence. You have cited lots of anecdotal evidence, but anecdotal evidence only gets you so far in a debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 i'm guessing you missed these stats then: non-firearm homicides firearm related homicide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94extreme Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 here are a few articles that tackle the issue: http://www.kqed.org/topics/news/perspectiv...ssault/1no.html http://www.truthlibertyfreedom.com/guncontrol.html http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/weapons.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoohaa Posted July 27, 2007 Share Posted July 27, 2007 (edited) i'm guessing you missed these stats then: non-firearm homicides firearm related homicide Not sure why you would say that. If you read my post you will notice that I mentioned South Africa being at the top of the list for firearm related crime. As I mentioned, South Africa has very strict gun control laws. What are you claiming that these statistics prove? Edited July 27, 2007 by hoohaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wannabe Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 How many people die from slipping on Banana's compared to the amount of Banana's present in the population... Wannabe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 Though I am loathed to look at particular postings here I did notice that someone doesn't know his facts and used South Africa as an example of how gun control doesn't work. We all know about the inherent poverty that is inflicted upon a massive section of the populous. We all know that poverty leads to desperation and that desperation leads to lawlessness especially when that poverty is of a 3rd. world, or even lower, rating. I like the loose term "gun control" when SA is used.... "Gun Control" Yeah, you just have to be able to walk to qualify for a gun in South Africa. You can get a gun anywhere, legally too. That's not gun control by any stretch. To use South Africa as an example of gun control, when it has never really know it and is only now trying to implement it, is absurd! Not at least unexpected though given the level of intellect used to forward agendas here. Here are some stats, actual facts that just might interest some here. http://www.gca.org.za/GunsinSA/Statistics/...34/Default.aspx Seems, even with all of the poverty, lawlessness, racial tensions and hatreds between various tribes that the murder rate is falling.... I say it seems to be falling because they are trying to implement gun control. What does it say about the ratio of legal as opposed to illegal guns used in crime? "Four out of five of the guns used were licensed firearms." Some people would have America look like South Africa is today by saying more guns are needed. Look what more guns did for them. What a joke! Some more to wrap your head around. http://ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=24835 http://www.csvr.org.za/articles/artguns.htm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1919382.stm These little bits of information might educate some more. My favourite quote....... "A UN Commission shows that owning a gun in South Africa increases your chances of being a victim because criminals target those carrying guns. Further, the proliferation of illegal and legal firearms in South Africa is increasingly creating a culture, especially amongst the young that a gun is a normal and fashionable accessory. The paradox of gun ownership is that carrying a gun may make you feel safer, but it actually increases the chances of other types of victimisation of yourself and others." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts