Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 145. (Read 450471 times)

I agree with U! Stop whit your stereotypes  !

As if all Americans were like this ...

If you like being controlled by other people, you will fit into the gun control scenario very well.

If you like controlling other people, you will fit into the gun control scenario very well.

It's people who don't want the control either way, but would rather control themselves in freedom, who are resisting you controllers.

Guns are in our genes we are hunters..

Well we're in a society. It's all about human interactions of course. You can't control anything else but human actions, what else could you do?

It's a bit a sneaky reasoning, you can apply this definition to EVERY decision taken by any kind of society. Not that it's wrong, but that is ALWAYS true, so not very interesting.

Right.

In America, because of the way the legal system is set up, the wolves need to be a lot sneakier about to make it work.

No, it's animal control. Wolves controlling sheep, all the way to their own democide, as seen in Germany prior to the end of WWII.

But in all this posting, you need to remember one major thing. The gun control that we are generally talking about in this thread is not really gun control. Rather, it is people control - people controlling other people.

It's also why you can't have just a part of a country which is gun free. You need the whole country to be gun free or without gun control, cause if you set gun free zones, criminals and citizens will easily get guns by just going out and back of the zone.

So the heavily-armed-teacher, staff, IDF & police schools in Israel are being shot up by Daesh at the same rate or worse than the "gun-free teacher, staff, and AWOL police officer zones" in the US?

I am so glad that we are counting less now.  Maybe we could change the rules again, and lower the counts even further?  It would be so nice to live in a nice world where guns meant less crime.  Isn't this true, if we make it seem like it's true?

That's easy to explain: the police changed the counting method.

No, that's probably not the reason.
They choose the schools because they hate the people there.

Why do you think so many mass shootings occur at a school, or other "gun free zone"?

The answer is that the crazy person knows it will be less likely that anyone will shoot back...

That's the sad reality... if they shoot up a school, they can kill 50 people before anyone stops them... if they tried that crap in the hood, they'd get killed before they got to 10...

Look at the highest violent crime metropolitan areas of the USA; there, the highest level of "gun control" short of actually going door to door, person to person, doing warrant-less searches and putting bullets in the head of anyone in mere possession of a gun, irregardless if man, woman, child, innocent, or guilty of a victimful crime.

How do you explain Vermont?

The state with the fewest gun laws (a child can carry a concealed handgun without a permit), has the lowest violent crime rate per capita...


The obvious conclusion is that when half the citizens are walking around with a concealed handgun, the criminals are scared...  Nobody wants to rob a store where multiple customers will defend the owner, that's suicide...

Here is what happens when people try to rob an establishment with armed customers:
Elderly Man Shoots Robbers at Internet Cafe

This is what reduces violent crime, not gun laws...

Yes rather easily.

First: the rise seems to not be the direct consequence from gun ban. If you look red and blue curves, they're not at all symmetrical. Seems like they're was an upper trend: the violent crimes rate was already levelling up and the rise seems to be independent from gun licenses.

Second: but if they're independent that means gun control is not an efficient way of lowering violent crime rates. Of course what I'm going to say is hypothetical, that's a good explanation I think but there can be no proof of my reasoning.
If you look at the evolution of the rates, you can see there is first no impact of gun control on violent crime rates, but then:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/profiles/United-Kingdom/Crime/Violent-crime

You see that the violent crime rates significantly decreases year after year.
My explanation (which is, again, hypothetical) would be that the rates diminish with the number of firearms actually in circulation. It's not because the government creates gun control that the population will immediately gives the guns to the police. It takes time for guns to finish in the hand of the police or to be forgotten somewhere or even thrown out. But as nobody sells guns, in the end the number of guns owned by the population can only decreases. Which is why the violent crime rates also decrease, but with some inertia.

Again, it's all hypothetical but I find this explanation rather logical and realist.

Like how Violent Crime increased in the UK as a direct result of banning guns?

How do you explain this one?

Hmm... We were not comparing gun deaths but violent crime rates. And they were much higher in the USA than in European countries where strict gun control is applied.

Where you're right though it's that statistical correlation is not a proof.
But I'm not giving a proof. As I said it's impossible to prove it unless doing some kind of A/B testing on a part of the population xD

It's just a statistical element that I think might be correlated with gun control. But again you can argue that violent crimes rates are different for other reasons. I just don't exactly see other reasons explaining such a difference, and especially not the "USA is more diversified" bullshit of Tecshare which is not only insulting for the whole EU but also based on absolutely nothing as far as I can see.

Gun control does absolutely nothing to reduce crime...

The numbers you see are just statistical manipulation, I'll explain...

You see people compare numbers like, "Gun control laws vs gun deaths"... this is a poorly(?) chosen statistic...

Why compare "gun deaths"?  Because "gun deaths" includes things like suicides, accidental shootings, etc... very different from "gun murders"...


If you compare the gun control laws of a country vs violent crimes, you will see that gun laws do nothing to stop violent crimes... gun laws only reduce "gun deaths" (mostly suicides by gunshot get reduced)

In places where guns are illegal, people resort to stabbing weapons like knives for their violence (UK is a great example)

UK has now make knives illegal because those became the weapon of choice since guns were already illegal...

Do you know what that will do?  NOTHING!... people will murder each other with baseball bats next... gun laws do not stop violence!

Nobody wants to see baseball bats become illegal!  Watch that first step, it's a slippery slope!

Or control them in a part of the USA.

Anyway I don't think we should. America and EU are just too different. It's not really possible to compare them. We both have our way of life, it doesn't mean one is superior to the other.