http://6.media.bustedtees.com/bustedtees/mf/2/3/bustedtees.ef270fa215d10509c3fd5a7396959940.gif

I bought a handgun today.

My baseball bat has been enough to fend off a few bad situations in the past, but things are getting notably worse in the low rent areas here lately. Especially in the face of rising crime due to the economic crisis, I'm not willing to wait until I need one to have one.

Even though it makes little sense, the looming Obama administration was enough to finally get me to go out and get that taken care of.

I was not alone. The place was absolutely overrun with people doing similar. The guys helping me said it had been that way ever since the election.

Yeah some people out here have been rushing to stock up on ammo and things for their collection. I still need to get one as well. When I was in the military our CO kept encouraging us to get some kind of weapon in case there was a huge earth quake in the bay area.

That said , what did you purchase?

One of these: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=11101&storeId=10001&productId=45932&langId=-1&parent_category_rn=15711&isFirearm=Y

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson//upload/images/firearms/209000_large.jpg

Glock 36 slimline in .45 is my CCW of choice.

http://guns4u.info/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/g36.jpg

The Glock was actually my second choice (out of a zillion I tried). I liked it a lot, but the safety features on the M&P sold me.

My only comment is, be sure to enroll in a gun safety course if you have not taken one, and keep a routine of periodic range practice and cleaning.

That's a nice price. I was thinking of a Sig Sauer myself. Ill have to check one of them out.

I'm a .45 Colt Govt, I had a S&W 9mm but I didn't like the lack of knockdown power.

I do not mean this horribly, I don't. I'm not here to start an argument, or criticize you.

I'm just speechless at the radical difference in culture, indeed it's quite shocking.

Going out to purchase a gun because crime is worse due to the economic downturn. I just can't get my head around it.

Going out to purchase a gun because crime is worse due to the economic downturn. I just can't get my head around it.

Halo, if you were in your home with your family and people tried to break in for whatever reason or tried to force their way in, would you want to have at least some manner of deterrent? State and city budgets are strained as well and there is a notion that Obama is going to make civilian gun ownership and purchase alot more difficult. If there is any actual truth to that..who knows but giving that calling the police might not always give you good service in some neighborhoods due to budget cuts, now might be the time to buy that piece. I own two handguns (Glock 22 and an old police Ruger .357 wheel gun) myself and when I can, I take them off to the range to maintain proficiency. As much as I like my pistols, if I wanted a serious home defense weapon nothing much beats the good ole shot gun. The rack of the round going from the tube into the chamber should be enough to tell any invader to beat it.

Going out to purchase a gun because crime is worse due to the economic downturn. I just can't get my head around it.

What's complicated about that? The whole gun control argument aside, your statement doesn't make sense to me.

Halo has been in academia too long, Sanchek. They don't put prestigious universities in bad neighborhoods. Plus the UK has always had tight gun control laws, to the point that private gun ownership is not even considered and is certainly not considered "a right".

Gonna get me a nice shotgun, first shot rock salt, the rest slugs. I personally have a Beretta PX4 Storm .45. Pretty good with it, but if my wife picked it up, I'd be concerned :P hence the shotgun.

I have an alarm system on my house, but truthfully Halo nothing stops an intruder better than death. I figure if the alarm doesn't scare them off, and the sound of a loading shell doesn't they've got it coming to them.

Halo has been in academia too long, Sanchek. They don't put prestigious universities in bad neighborhoods. Plus the UK has always had tight gun control laws, to the point that private gun ownership is not even considered and is certainly not considered "a right".

Yeah, I know they're loony about guns over there (meanwhile, knife violence explodes and replaces gun violence after they tighten their gun ban up).

I just don't get how there's any question about the cause/effect relationship between wanting to protect my property and buying a gun. Agree with it or not, the reasoning should be pretty clear.

Sometimes a good dog helps alot too. /shrug. I have lived in a quite a few houses where bars and day gates were standard on the windows and doors along with reinforced jambs and upgraded locks. If only they put bases in better parts of town......

Gonna get me a nice shotgun, first shot rock salt, the rest slugs. I personally have a Beretta PX4 Storm .45. Pretty good with it, but if my wife picked it up, I'd be concerned :P hence the shotgun.

I think I'm going to do the same in the end. Same issue with my girlfriend.

I'm really looking forward to taking the pistol to the range and practicing though, either way. It's been at least 15 years since I shot a gun.

Sometimes a good dog helps alot too. /shrug. I have lived in a quite a few houses where bars and day gates were standard on the windows and doors along with reinforced jambs and upgraded locks. If only they put bases in better parts of town......

We have a 30lb Boston Terrier. The scariest thing about him is his breath. :(

'Halo, if you were in your home with your family and people tried to break in for whatever reason or tried to force their way in, would you want to have at least some manner of deterrent? State and city budgets are strained as well and there is a notion that Obama is going to make civilian gun ownership and purchase alot more difficult. If there is any actual truth to that..who knows but giving that calling the police might not always give you good service in some neighborhoods due to budget cuts, now might be the time to buy that piece. I own two handguns (Glock 22 and an old police Ruger .357 wheel gun) myself and when I can, I take them off to the range to maintain proficiency. As much as I like my pistols, if I wanted a serious home defense weapon nothing much beats the good ole shot gun. The rack of the round going from the tube into the chamber should be enough to tell any invader to beat it.'

- Absolutely not, I would never wish to own a gun, the mere thought of weilding one actually makes me somewhat disgusted.

Again, I'm not judging anyone here, I'm just startled at the culture difference. If I were frightened, I'd go out and buy an alarm system or better locks - whereas it would appear you guys go and buy weapons. It's just such a difference. Often hard to get my head around.

The best alarm and locks in the world will not keep someone out or your family alive before someone can get in or kill them.

That said I saw a hilarious video of some UK police (bobbies?) trying to stop a high speed chase with batons.

I do not want to ever have to shoot someone, but I will. Id rather do that than lose a family member. Home invasion is getting much more prevalent here.

welcome to the club. Here is just a small portion of collection.

http://www.talismanguild.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=3526&stc=1&d=1230503618

'That said I saw a hilarious video of some UK police (bobbies?) trying to stop a high speed chase with batons.'

- And yet we have a lower crime rate.
For every one of those movies you've seen, there's 10 of US police trying to stop high speed chases with both sides shooting.
For all your arguments, you cannot refute the high level of gun related murders - or the high level of crime full stop - in the US, compared to other Western countries.

Nonetheless I'm sure the next 10 pages will be created by arguments of gun-happy Yanks trying to avoid explaining the statistics.

Halo, the problem is two-fold. Nearly anyone without a serious criminal record can apply to own a gun in the US. Those who don't own a gun are severely disadvantaged.

In countries like Japan and Korea where gun ownership by the civilian populace is not allowed, gun crime is not a serious problem.

However, in countries such as the US, anyone can own a gun, which would highly encourage people like me to purchase one--just in case somebody tries to kill me.

The second problem isn't really a problem, but more of a right. The second amendment was created as an insurance policy against bad governance. Should the government become injudicious, guns would supposedly be the means to reclaim the country for the will of the people.

If I were frightened, I'd go out and buy an alarm system or better locks - whereas it would appear you guys go and buy weapons. It's just such a difference. Often hard to get my head around.

Halo, we all do those steps to increase home security as well. Alarms and locks do however represent a significant investment of money. Its not just the alarms, since you should also daygate your doors and burgler bar your windows. Also whats the sense of putting 300 dollars of locks on a 50 dollar door with a press board jamb? Ultimately its cheapest to buy a 500 dollar gun and take a class to learn how to be responsible as a fire arm owner if your budget is limited. If you live in a nieghborhood where you feel you need a deterrent, chances are you can't afford much other deterrent. Its that or sell your home and find another part of town to live in.

Halo, the problem is two-fold. Nearly anyone without a serious criminal record can apply to own a gun in the US. Those who don't own a gun are severely disadvantaged.

You make it sound like its the Wild West here with everyone packing heat. Most of the time the gripe about guns is the results of people being careless about handling them and storing them.

Nonetheless I'm sure the next 10 pages will be created by arguments of gun-happy Yanks trying to avoid explaining the statistics.

That would be a waste of time. No opinion or statement of statistics posted by anyone in the US can change anyone's mind in Europe, which is fine. This isn't a case where its either region's business. So have your opinion and we can have ours and save alot of bullshit.

Also, a thing about crime statics and comparing the US to other countries, especially asian ones:

I would hope a homogenious culture would have lower crime. A socialist nation should also have lower crime as well. The US has alot of issues because of the diversity and because of the fact that you have alot more choice in if you fail or succeed, which in turn fuels more crime. Go peg the problem of crime on something else, because a gun is just a piece of plastic, wood and metal. You can kill someone just as easy with a baseball bat, a tire iron or a knife. The economic and social issues are what is at the root of crime.

Halo, if you were in your home with your family and people tried to break in for whatever reason or tried to force their way in, would you want to have at least some manner of deterrent? State and city budgets are strained as well and there is a notion that Obama is going to make civilian gun ownership and purchase alot more difficult. If there is any actual truth to that..who knows but giving that calling the police might not always give you good service in some neighborhoods due to budget cuts, now might be the time to buy that piece. I own two handguns (Glock 22 and an old police Ruger .357 wheel gun) myself and when I can, I take them off to the range to maintain proficiency. As much as I like my pistols, if I wanted a serious home defense weapon nothing much beats the good ole shot gun. The rack of the round going from the tube into the chamber should be enough to tell any invader to beat it.


Yep. I have 2 hand guns but went out 20 gauge shopping.... :)

Nonetheless I'm sure the next 10 pages will be created by arguments of gun-happy Yanks trying to avoid explaining the statistics.

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=925

Whether Georgia and Sweden are counting apples and oranges is a fair question. But however one parses the data, it is nevertheless true that “The number of reported sex crimes increased by twelve percent to just over 11,700 in 2005.” So the up tick isn’t merely an artifact of new laws. A 44% increase over 2004 means that there would have been something in the neighborhood of 2,600 rapes under the old laws, still about 25% higher than in Georgia.

Let’s look at a few more:

* Assault: Georgia - 22,409, Sweden - 72,645.
* Burglary: Georgia - 79,834, Sweden - 113,604
* Robbery: Georgia - 13,801, Sweden - 9,398
* Larceny: Georgia - 234,444, Sweden - 372,882
* Motor-Vehicle Theft: Georgia - 43,414, Sweden - 56,719

One of the statistically safest cities in my state (Georgia) is the one with the mandatory gun ownership law. The most dangerous areas are the same ones where people are all squeamish about owning guns, while the criminals in the area certainly do not share that handicap.

/shrug.

Yea, not the wild west. I have actually never witnessed a crime being committed outside of the Tv. That being said I live in a rural community where it may take the police 15 minutes or more to get here depending where the 2 cops in the town are eating donuts. I am not relying on tweedldee and tweedledumb to be first responders. This town is a higway junction town. like 5 major highways hub and connect right there. so this is full of trucks and freaking illegals passing by. It would be so easy for someone o get robbed or some kid kidnapped. But it does not happen. Why? everyone knows rural rednecks are armed to the teeth. An armed society is a polite society. Consequently there are a lot of people who don't even lock there doors at night. Oh, this is the wifes home defense toy since I work 3rd shift. I refuse t oplay what ifs with home/security.

Mossberg 500 Tactical Cruiser with the door breech mussel break.

http://www.mossberg.com/images/Mossberg_Guns/930/New/54125.jpg

Get off my lawn...

http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BODc0MzIwNzgzMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNjUwMzUxMg@@._ V1._SX600_SY400_.jpg

rofl


That's what I was looking at, how accurate is it?

WHO needs accuracy with it? I load alternate rounds of 00 and slugs.

Looking to purchase a Glock 26 for CCW and of course the faithful shotgun for general purposes.

Truth is violence is just that. Your average citizen isn't prepare to respond to protect themselves at the level of agression required to stop your local thug.

As someone said earlier the hefty sound of a round being chambered in a shotgun produces a pavlovian response in most folks. It makes them stop and think. Getting these idiots to think is the first step to stopping the reaction to do harm.

A dog is another great detterent, tho my 10lb mini dachsund isn't going to produce visual fear in most folks...his bark is rather larger than he is.

So this would be page 3 of trying to avoid explaining the high rate of gunfire murder?

I understand your argument Fanny, that it's a great deterrent - but it doesn't appear to work? On the contrary, it makes many countries without gun cultures appear relatively safe in comparison. I take it we shall see page four of trying to submerge these factors in idle gun-blasting? Pun intended.

With the way you guys talk about firearms, it appears to be, more than anything, a fascination and love of weaponary, than of needing it for protection?.

'One of the statistically safest cities in my state (Georgia) is the one with the mandatory gun ownership law. The most dangerous areas are the same ones where people are all squeamish about owning guns, while the criminals in the area certainly do not share that handicap.'

- First, take note of this, from your same source: "Mark from Sweden has made a stirring defense of Sweden’s honor in the comments. Some of his points are convincing, such as the fact that Georgia’s numbers for assault may be one type of assault only, while Sweden’s may be a broader category. Sorting this out would require research time I don’t have at the moment." My bold.

This is what I mean. You will simply attempt to ignore the fact in question here, mostly by submerging it, that guncrime in the US is endemic. Here's an interesting source:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita

You're up there with Belarus, Costa Rica and Uruguay. Yes, well done, Americans *are* safer for being armed. I'm not saying the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, Sweden are safer countries, I'm saying America is no safer for being armed. That is the point here.

I agree with that.. It's fun to shoot shit. I think your Academia and feigned intellectualism has, as in most cases with people of your ilk, caused you to loose sight of the real world. Like I said. I have never seen a crime in real life being committed. But I'm not taking that chance. You can if you want.

So this would be page 3 of trying to avoid explaining the high rate of gunfire murder and the crime level in general?

I understand your argument Fanny, that it's a great deterrent - but it doesn't appear to work? On the contrary, those Western countries without gun cultures appear relatively safe in comparison. I take it we shall see page four of trying to submerge these factors in idle gun-blasting? Pun intended.

With the way you guys talk about firearms, it appears to be, more than anything, a fascination and love of weaponary, than of needing it for protection?

Decided to skip my post with statistics to the contrary of your claims (which you have not backed with a single number yet)?

I understand your dislike of the firearm culture Halo. However that being said you have a growing issue with crime over there do you not?

Violence persists and unless you can prove to me your baddies don't pack heat I'm not sure of your concern with our citizens packing heat.

Sorry San - I was in the process of editing, not having read your original post (clicking on the thread from front-page brings me to the end, not my last post).

Fan - the burden is on you to prove to me that Americans are safer for being armed. They are not.

Pointing to aggregate gun violence is unconvincing to me.

I'd like to see how much gun violence involves a properly registered firearm. Criminals are going to use guns regardless of the law. Taking them away from law abiding citizens only strengthens the position of those who don't care about the laws to begin with.

- Absolutely not, I would never wish to own a gun, the mere thought of weilding one actually makes me somewhat disgusted.

Again, I'm not judging anyone here, I'm just startled at the culture difference. If I were frightened, I'd go out and buy an alarm system or better locks - whereas it would appear you guys go and buy weapons. It's just such a difference. Often hard to get my head around.

There is a huge difference. In Britain, citizens are conditioned to rely upon the state (i.e. the police) to protect their persons, abdicating their self defense rights using lethal force to the state. This has upsides and downsides. If your police are effective and the general populace law abiding, it prevents some degree of accidental death and impulsive murders. The downside is that if the police fall down on the job and you are facing a better armed criminal who wishes you harm, you're screwed. As others pointed out, other forms of violence fill the gap (i.e. knifings) as well.

In the US the firearm culture is deeply ingrained from tradition and philosophy. Distrust of the state (and the police in particular) is part and parcel of our culture these days. We don't want to abdicate our right to use lethal force in self defense precisely because we don't trust the police to protect us (in time) and prefer to rely on our own resources when under attack. The downside of this is that criminals have easier access to firearms in general, we have far more accidental shootings and crimes of passion become much more lethal. The upside is that tardy arrival of police won't automatically mean a criminal can murder you or your family at leisure and criminals in general are given a degree of pause when contemplating a home intrusion for whatever purpose.

Add to this a very large portion of the country where hunting is a viable activity with strong traditions and you don't get the general fear and mistrust of firearms as you find in densely populated parts of Europe.

Firearms usage is a valuable right, but one that must be taken seriously and with great responsibility. When you own a firearm, you are obligated to know how to operate and store it safely to prevent mishaps. If there is one area that we fall down on, it is this.

BTW I own several firearms, having been a hunter since my early teens. I'm 48 years old and have never witnessed anyone shot (with the exception of myself being hit with rock salt as a teen while swiping watermelons from a farmers field).

Firearms usage is a valuable right, but one that must be taken seriously and with great responsibility. When you own a firearm, you are obligated to know how to operate and store it safely to prevent mishaps. If there is one area that we fall down on, it is this.

Yes, that.

It's definitely too easy for someone inept and/or careless to get firearms. How quickly I was able to buy a gun and ammo yesterday and then take it home to my densely populated suburban neighborhood definitely underscored that in my mind.

Well like I said at the very beginning, I know it's a matter of culture - this entire thread was a startling reminder at just how different we are.

But for all these posts you guys are sending my way, no one has proved that bearing arms makes Americans any safer. Indeed, it points to the contrary.

Does it? I'd still like to see some sensible numbers that prove your claims.

I'm not saying I know for sure, but I do know a specious argument when I see one. Showing me a number that includes gangs doing drive-by shootings on each other and then using that to claim that normal citizens are no safer for being armed is not good logic.

in your eyes i guess...

Not really, you made the claim that we're less safe without facts to back it up.

You bear the weight to prove differently as most crimes with firearms are not committed by registered guns.

The market for stolen firearms is global not US specific right?

It's interesting that you guys (Brits) have this attitude toward guns, yet are ranked 7th in the world when it comes to arms exports...

for dogs may I suggest the two in my avatar. They are Rusty and Angel, two American Staffordshire terriers. I WUV MY DOGS!!! And they sleep right next to me at night, your going to have two mouths full of teeth on ya before you know it, they are so damn smart.

'That said I saw a hilarious video of some UK police (bobbies?) trying to stop a high speed chase with batons.'

- And yet we have a lower crime rate.
For every one of those movies you've seen, there's 10 of US police trying to stop high speed chases with both sides shooting.
For all your arguments, you cannot refute the high level of gun related murders - or the high level of crime full stop - in the US, compared to other Western countries.

Nonetheless I'm sure the next 10 pages will be created by arguments of gun-happy Yanks trying to avoid explaining the statistics.

Britain has always had a lower murder rate than the US, even before it banned public ownership of firearms. It exported its most violent people to the colonies and we are the descendants of those people. Go figure.

Something to consider. Jamaica (which uses British law including ban on firearms) has a higher murder rate than the US. Switzerland (which has mandatory firearm ownership) has a lower murder rate than Britain. Explain that.

Clearly the root causes lie elsewhere.

Just bought this little baby today...nuclear capable...excellent home defense weapon

http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/moremanpics/b-52_11.jpg

Dammn...that gave me a woody.

I was looking at one of those the other day Rov.. Does that come with a warranty?

ROFL Rover!!

'It's interesting that you guys (Brits) have this attitude toward guns, yet are ranked 7th in the world when it comes to arms exports...'

- See, this is what I see on this forum time and again. Not the argument for how Americans are safer bearing arms, but just attempts to submerge the argument.
I've already posted evidence to show the high rate of gunfire murders, you're up there with Colombia and South Africa. Good job.

http://www.neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/statistics.htm

Here's some more statistics, this one is my favourite (unfortunately)...

'American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)'

Oh, oh, or this one...

'Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)
The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control) '

- Yey for Americans being safer for guns??

And we tell you guns are part of the very fabric that makes America what it is today.. Since they are as common as the English and yellow teeth everyone might as well have one 'cause damn sure the bad guys will.

Its a different world Halo, and I'm not sure its for the better or worse but it sure is different. I've lived in Washington, DC and its suburbs for 8 years - one of the higher crime cities in the country. I used to live in Prague for about 8 months. In DC I've never had a run in with any sort of crime. In Prague I was pick pocketed twice. I know this is totally anecdotal and hardly a barometer of what life is like - but I still felt much safer in Prague than I do in DC late at night. I would stumble home drunk at 4 in the morning alone from downtown Prague, something I'd never dream to do here. The worst thing that ever could (and did) happen there was I'd get my wallet stolen. Violent crime simply doesn't seem to exist in Europe like it does here.

Speaking of Man's Best Friend... my father sent me this little clip this morning of a particularly heroic (police) dog doing its duty... amazing the speed and energy with which this animal vaults over the car (into gunfire) and takes out the shooter:


http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=04fbdecafe&view=att&th=11ebd111daf86424&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw

Regards,
Nydia

what the world thinks americans are like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELol1dHjHEE

i kid, i kid.

And Halo, for better or worse, guns, including, unfortunately, handguns, are a deeply embedded part of the American culture. While I'm a decent shot with a rifle, and had small arms training a zillion years ago, I'm deeply ambivalent about the issue of owning a handgun and their availability to the general public. Too often, people don't get properly trained in how to use them and worse, think they're the cure for all ills (overestimate their ability to react at close quarters while half awake, among other things) - and for people who are not *very* comfortable with them, the presence of a handgun in the home presents puts the owner and his/her family in *more* danger than not having one.

That said, I know quite a few people who own handguns and/or have concealed carry permits who have taken the time to train properly and are aware of their limitations, and respect their decision to carry. At this juncture, largely due to the loss of function in my right hand having reached a critical point, I wouldn't own one, for the aforementioned reasons (it's more likely to harm than benefit me).

I'd like to see mandatory training and periodic certification required for handgun purchase in the US, even as I recognize that thugs are always going to be able to get around such restrictions; but at least then the people having the accidents (or being assaulted with their own weapons) won't be law-abiding citizens...

Regards,
Nydia

Those statistics don't look right to me, halo, based on what I've seen before -- you tend to get a lot of people doing somewhat questionable statistical methodology like grouping suicides into "murder" or counting military deaths by gunfire too. I don't have any counter evidence handy however, it does seem like 80 gunfire deaths A DAY is unrealistic as that is more than 1 violent murder per major town per day, almost 30,000 a year. That doesn't jive with numerous other violent crime stats.

However, the major issue that is largely ignored is that guns are already legally controlled in the United States. Very little gun crime is committed with legally obtained weapons, and only an absolutely minuscule fraction of weapons are used for crime at all. If guns were actually causal to this, the numbers should be much, much higher; at minimum on par with deaths from auto accidents. In the end, gun control is a red herring issue that won't fix crime, much like the absence of them don't magically eliminate crime in other places.

UH OH! Don't make me come bust some facts out on your English ass.

http://gunowners.org/sk0802.htm




Ohh shooot it even has links for skeptics.

Things not to shoot with your new gun...OUCH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ABGIJwiGBc

I knew that what the link was..ROFL! I saw that about about a year ago. Never ceases to amaze me.. That guy is...well. I'd say lucky but that doesn't seem to do it justice.

Ok, I can't resist.. A day at the range for Jedd and Halo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlFlXMHaSVQ&feature=related

My conspiracy addled mind sometimes suggests that I should buy a gun, in case the US ever falls apart and it's every man for himself. As far as dissuading criminals, I doubt the effectiveness of a weapon, and suspect the stories where a gun has saved someone are few, far between, and likely exaggerated. Since most people don't carry a gun everywhere, you have to leave the weapon at home and properly secure it. In the event that I'm going to be wanting a weapon, I would need to locate it, unlock it, arm it, and shoot or threaten. Leaving an unsecured weapon is asking for all sorts of problems, especially if you're robbed while not home. The likelihood of having the weapon ready when needed, unless you carry all the time, is just too small.

I don't have anything against owning a gun - I have two target rifles - but I just don't see them as a defensive weapon in the modern era.

As far as dogs go, I like to believe that my dog's bark is enough to scare off an intruder, but most intruders are smart enough to throw some dog biscuits in their pocket. If your dog is remotely socialized and not trained to guard the home, I'm not sure how much stock I'd place in them becoming violent towards a human smart enough to use a kind voice and give them food.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6k-XJHiShB0&feature=related

Nuff said!

'It's interesting that you guys (Brits) have this attitude toward guns, yet are ranked 7th in the world when it comes to arms exports...'

- See, this is what I see on this forum time and again. Not the argument for how Americans are safer bearing arms, but just attempts to submerge the argument.

And again, you cherry-picked my last post, ignoring my other direct reply to you. Show us something that actually speaks to the issue, not opportunistic, aggregate numbers.

Most important, let's see numbers on registered weapons. You can't expect to be taken seriously if you show us numbers that include gang on gang violence, tallied up by some anti-firearm organization, and then present them with bias.

You might as well cite Europe as a dangerous place to live by averaging in WWII deaths.

Since most people don't carry a gun everywhere, you have to leave the weapon at home and properly secure it. In the event that I'm going to be wanting a weapon, I would need to locate it, unlock it, arm it, and shoot or threaten.

Use a safe like one of these, for restricted, yet quick access: http://www.gunsafes.com/GunVault.html

Though, like others said, a shotgun is the best choice for defense (and cheaper too).

Use a safe like one of these, for restricted, yet quick access: http://www.gunsafes.com/GunVault.html

Though, like others said, a shotgun is the best choice for defense (and cheaper too).I almost want one of those just to own a biometric lock!

My conspiracy addled mind sometimes suggests that I should buy a gun, in case the US ever falls apart and it's every man for himself. As far as dissuading criminals, I doubt the effectiveness of a weapon, and suspect the stories where a gun has saved someone are few, far between, and likely exaggerated. Since most people don't carry a gun everywhere, you have to leave the weapon at home and properly secure it. In the event that I'm going to be wanting a weapon, I would need to locate it, unlock it, arm it, and shoot or threaten. Leaving an unsecured weapon is asking for all sorts of problems, especially if you're robbed while not home. The likelihood of having the weapon ready when needed, unless you carry all the time, is just too small.



This is the big argument regarding those who buy weapons to protect their home. Rarely does the homeowner have the weapon within reach, and when someone breaks through the door of the home there is not always time to get to the weapon before the intruder gets to the homeowner, and so often the weapon becomes the very tool of choice for causing harm to the homeowner.

I am not anti-gun by any means, but being realistic I figure a meat cleaver properly placed can be just as effective as a gun in the home for close quarters combat with an intruder.

Honestly I would probably kill him with my hands before I took the time to grab a weapon.

This is the big argument regarding those who buy weapons to protect their home. Rarely does the homeowner have the weapon within reach, and when someone breaks through the door of the home there is not always time to get to the weapon before the intruder gets to the homeowner, and so often the weapon becomes the very tool of choice for causing harm to the homeowner.

This does go back to the fact that a good alarm and beefed up doors and windows will mitigate people getting into your home unannounced. You can even place some cameras here and there and turn your PC into a DVR for it. Logitech markets the devices to do that. Its all not cheap. For a good alarm, upgraded locks, burgler bars, gates and any other physical deterrent you might have to take out a home equity or improvement loan and thats only good if you own the place. It does add value to the home but again, this is more for the wealthier suburbanite to protect themselves from the professional criminal, not the newly homeless and unemployed commiting crime out of desperation.

Otherwise if you live an in apartment and the neighborhood has gone to shit and you don't have ties or a need to stay there:

Move to another apartment in a better part of town. Even if you have to get roommates.

If the city has gone to shit:

Move to another city. Hopefully your job allows you to transfer.

If none of that works and you have exhausted all options and you just have to take your chances where you are and can't afford much else than a gun, then if the gun makes your mind be at ease about crime than get the gun. I have my guns for target shooting more than home defence. I enjoy marksmanship. Its a good stress reliever. I still don't have a shotgun but that would be what I would buy just to tell a would be home invader to get out. You have to remember I spend the majority of my time overseas, so its been rare that I have had a permanent address to worry about.

And Kelraz, Europe has no violent crime because they are better than us. Is that what everyone is fishing here about? /gets the bullhorn:

"Europe is better than us, people! Europe is fucking perfect!"

There. can we move on?

Hardly, LummusL. Europe is still a violent, crime-ridden place. Remember, there's not just Western Europe. I would hardly call Bulgaria a cherry-garden.

But this isn't about Europe. Nor is it about whether arming yourself is right or wrong. It was about San saying "I feel unsafe so I bought a gun today." And me replying "Fuck, I forgot just how radically different our cultures are - I could never resort to a gun". Then it was about half the Yanks going "OMG GUNS R SO GUD" and then me asking "How do they make you safer?" And then San posting a statistic, and me replying with my own half a dozen, and then San saying statistics are rubbish.

That's it. I was never saying it was wrong - I just am not convinced yet that by arming yourself, you are any safer. But whether I turn out to be right or wrong, I nonetheless stand by my original, innocent statement of yikes - you guys do like your guns!

Say this happened to you and your wife:

ROSWELL, Ga. (AP) -- A Roswell man and his family survived a home invasion after police say two robbers approached him as he was walking his dogs.

Roswell Police Lt. James McGee Arthur Rappaport was approached Thursday evening by two men wearing ski masks and gloves.

One of the men had a gun and used it to hit Rappaport in the head.

The suspects then went inside and assaulted Rappaport's wife, Lisa, and the couple's son and daughter. The family members were taken to a hospital where they were treated and released.

McGee said the house was probably targeted and the robbers had likely been watching it for a while.

The suspects got away with money.

No matter how much faith you put in law enforcement, they are of no use in most situations like this. It's going to be over long before they arrive.

What would be the successful British reaction to that situation, that we crazy Yanks don't understand?

I figure a meat cleaver properly placed can be just as effective as a gun in the home for close quarters combat with an intrude

heh i keep a 10" scimitar knife (16" overall) i keep next to my bed just in case.
since i dont little ones running around anymore i've been considering picking up a firearm. probably go with a .45 for stopping power.

Theres nothing wrong with firearms. Only criminals and idiots make them bad.

This will really freak Halo out...


The Knob Creek night shoot....

Now these are all civilians Halo with their private collections. There is a waiting list years long just for this moment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31vm3-BQRJU

Tell me that does not look fun.

A little expose with R. Lee. Ermy on Knob Creek.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIZpCLvXsoM&feature=related

This is why no nation on earth would invade America.

Aye, that's why.

*rolls eyes*

This will really freak Halo out...


The Knob Creek night shoot....

Now these are all civilians Halo with their private collections. There is a waiting list years long just for this moment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31vm3-BQRJU

Tell me that does not look fun.

A little expose with R. Lee. Ermy on Knob Creek.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIZpCLvXsoM&feature=related

This is why no nation on earth would invade America.

That Knob creek thing was fucking awesome!

what the world thinks americans are like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELol1dHjHEE

i kid, i kid.

oh man .... lol

That video being of a guy in Costa Rica sort of ruins the zing...

It was about San saying "I feel unsafe so I bought a gun today." And me replying "Fuck, I forgot just how radically different our cultures are - I could never resort to a gun".

That's it. I was never saying it was wrong - I just am not convinced yet that by arming yourself, you are any safer. But whether I turn out to be right or wrong, I nonetheless stand by my original, innocent statement of yikes - you guys do like your guns!

For the number of weapons available to people in North America, violent crime with guns is infinitesimal.

Unfortunately I can't find the criminology books I used to have, which were researched from the 1940s-1990s and published in ~2000-2002. Not sure where I packed them. The salient points they had though were the following:

Violent crime, per capita, in the US had decreased drastically for the majority of the period.

The number of weapons had also increased, although it had decreased (slightly) per capita.

Areas with tight gun restrictions had equal or higher crime rates. It was usually higher but that was strongly correlated with population and unemployment, such that I would not associate gun restrictions with
implicitly higher crime.

The single most telling indicator of violent crime was involvement with narcotics.


It is, of course, entirely possible that these trends have reversed in the last five years, but I highly doubt it. More importantly, no gun legislation proposed in that period appears to have had any statistical effect on violent crime.

So if San buys a gun and it makes him feel safer, that's because he's more in control of an unlikely scenario he may one day be in. It does not, however, make him any less safe. Whether or not he's actually any safer is probably irrelevant because so many other behaviors of his have a much, much greater impact on his likelihood of suffering some unfortunate event (driving, swimming, drinking -- particularly around the earlier two, economic demographics, cancer risks, etc).



Edit:

I wanted to comment further on the narcotics element. If you select for people victimized by violent crime but that crime was NOT drug trafficking related - you are about as safe in the US as the historically "low crime" countries like Switzerland or Canada. The real difference between crime in the US and crime in Britain is the amount and direction of the narcotics flows, as well as the prevalence of the areas it happens in. I'm sure if you went back to some parts of Britain during the 70s and 80s you could probably find similar rates of violent crime because of the conflagration of drug market related incidents.

Picked up this weapon today as a nice starter shotgun

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_tQr2Lz_-Xj0/SBykpCDMbSI/AAAAAAAAAkk/4VD4TJt-OGg/s400/MOssberg+Combo.jpg

Mossberg 500 combo. Figured I can give hunting a try with some friends that go hunting, and change the barrel for home defense.

Damn California 10 day cooldown period has me waiting another 10 days after I paid for this sucker before I can pick it up :(

mossberg is nice.... I could never get into hunting. It takes too much time. I live in the "sportsmans" paradise but it just never was much fun. Target shooting is much more fun. You don't have to wait 3 hours to shoot!

That mossberg will kick like a mother. I killed my first bear with one, 3" mags.

I have 0 interest in hunting other than knowing how to find animals for food. I have never hunted and likely never will. I don't feel the need to shoot stuff.

I have 0 interest in hunting other than knowing how to find animals for food. I have never hunted and likely never will. I don't feel the need to shoot stuff.

Never had an interest in it before, but I kinda feel like giving it a try, provided that what I kill will be eaten of course. Would never be able to kill just for sport.

I would suggest duck :)

You get to be wet, cold and eat good !

I'm a little late coming in to the thread, but I'd like some simple advice from any of you gun gurus.

Soon (or within the next few years) I would like to purchase my first firearm for the standard home defense reasons. My dad always owned a few when I was growing up (a basic .22 rifle for shooting turtles and musk-rats, Magnum pistol, etc.) and I have shot a few over the years, but not extensively at all, thus I am a gun n00b for all practical purposes, even though I am 22 years old, and mostly from Alabama lol.

So, should I be looking at a shotgun, 9mm pistol, or what would you suggest? I would look into full licensing/certification/training.

If you're not looking into carrying I'd suggest a shotgun.

Point and shoot, very simple very easy.

Shotgun. 20 or 12 gauge imo.

Home defense = shotgun. Mix the rounds up at your discretion: rock salt, bird shot, double 00, slugs, etc. But a shotgun will often be effective just letting the intruder hear the round chambered.

Go back a page or two to my post of my wifes home defense shotgun I posted a pic of. Mossberg 500 Tactical Cruiser. Dead easy to use. Light and fairly cheap. No need to worry about accuracy to much. Just racking a round in it in the dark is fairly impressive.

I grew up around guns. My dad was a State Cop and I used to go to the range with him to practice/qualify. While my dad only had his Beretta 9, his riot Shotgun and a .38 spare, many Staties are hardcore gun nuts and I saw/shot an insane assortment of weaponry.

So yea.. I get the gun thing. Hell, I have a whole garage full of cool tools that I barely use. And guns are a pretty cool tool. Whenever I see Weaponology on the TV, the channel always stops.

That being said, as a father with kids in the house, I don't think in anyway that guns belong here. I know the statistics, Im sure you know them too. If my concern is to create the safest situation in my house for my children, then guns have no place there.

I know the precautions my dad took.. he kept it all locked away and not very accessible at all times. Thats what you need to do when you are a parent and have guns. And then what is the point?
"Hold on home invaders whilst I retrieve my weaponry from its secure place of holding"
Nah, I put my faith in sturdy doors, good deadbolts, secure windows, automatic lighting and a 6'5" angry dad protecting his family with an expandable baton if it ever came down to it.

you still live with your dad? rofl!!! sorry. couldn't help it.

Never had an interest in it before, but I kinda feel like giving it a try, provided that what I kill will be eaten of course. Would never be able to kill just for sport.

I have always thought bow hunting or something would be a lot more sporting if I wanted to do hunting.

Get a spear, go old school!

I have always thought bow hunting or something would be a lot more sporting if I wanted to do hunting.

Get a spear, go old school!


Eliza Dushku is a bow hunter, if you want a good reason to take it up. :D

Eliza Dushku is a bow hunter, if you want a good reason to take it up. :D

Good enough for me!

I wish you could own crossbows out here.

I've been seriously considering a purchase myself. I hvaen't owned a gun since I was married but wouldn't mind having something less b/c of crime and more b/c I'm worried that I won't be able to buy one in a few years. I want a rifle or shotgun though, I don't like handguns. I have some pesky ground hogs, skunks, and possums that like to wander in my yard. I'd love to have something to help rid me of the problem. My cat has been attacked 2x in the past month by something. He's deterred from going out as much for the moment but this shit is pissing me off.

I'm definitely going to get a shotgun to keep at home. I wouldn't feel comfortable with my girlfriend trying to use the pistol in a stressful situation, but I know she could handle a shotgun well enough to protect herself.

I strongly recommend taking your girlfriend along to the gun store, so that she see how the pump/slide mechanism works, and to be sure the weapon selected is one that she can operate. I have watched folks of both sexes have trouble with that; but, I still am in favor of getting a pump shotgun (I like the police style riot gun), due in large part to the extra rounds available as well as the psychological impact of hearing the round chambered as mentioned earlier.

Have you all ever killed someone? Even someone trying to kill you? More chance than not you will freeze or kill someone innocent. To many itchy trigger fingers.

Well you know when things itch it's ok to scratch it unless it's an infection and then that might not be good cause it may spread or something. Nope I have never killed anyone with a real gun but damn virtual guns, knives, swords, bows? hell yeah lots :D

Have you all ever killed someone? Even someone trying to kill you? More chance than not you will freeze or kill someone innocent. To many itchy trigger fingers.

I would have answer yes to one of those questions.....=) Of course LEO work has its perks depending how you look at it.

Glad killing people makes you so happy.

Glad killing people makes you so happy.


/sigh

Chill out, 'wienie.

What a douche.. Did I say yes to which? Hmmmmmmm?

You either said yes to "have you ever killed someone?" or "have you ever killed someone trying to kill you?". I have spent a lot of time through my work or personally know far too many people who could answer yes to both of those, but none would be so callous to reply with a smiley emoticon in the same sentence.

May haps I R SMRT!? I miss read that as to having someone having attempted to killing me.. My bad but it does not belay the fact Ain is still a douche..

YOU ARE SO CLEVER!

According to what you posted, you either enjoy killing people or enjoy having people try to kill you.

If it's the former, which is clearly the more logical of the two, then you're a fucking piece of shit.

If it's the latter, you're as insane as we all know you are.

And Bylimet - shut the fuck up.

HAHAHA Ain what a tard you have become. I thought, like, liberals were all accepting and shit. All you do is spew hate.. Fuck you.. fag!..peice of shit! STFU byl! thats all we hear anymore. What has happened to you little buddy? Come on tell us. We are here to help and listen to your stories about your Vajayjay itching.. People can change Ain.. Obama says so. Change with us Ain. Don't be a hater.

YOU ARE SO CLEVER!

According to what you posted, you either enjoy killing people or enjoy having people try to kill you.

If it's the former, which is clearly the more logical of the two, then you're a fucking piece of shit.

If it's the latter, you're as insane as we all know you are.

And Bylimet - shut the fuck up.


Oh noes, my feelings are hurt.

Out of curiosity tho', who are you to decide the above statements? You drop in here now and then to impart some holier than thou crap, and attempt to display some silly superiority, and then insult one or two before tossing a tantrum and saying you are finished posting here. Yet, you keep coming back to find some new way to make yourself feel above someone else. Killing people does not need to involve happiness or enjoyment to make it an art worthy of appreciation, and having people trying to kill you is part of many an occupation and actually helps to sharpen one's skills at self-preservation and survival. But then, you would know nothing of this up on that pedestal of self-righteoous acedemia.

Oh, excuse me, I was supposed to shut the fuck up.

'Killing people does not need to involve happiness or enjoyment to make it an art worthy of appreciation,'

- Honestly though Byl, it would appear to be that way from the impression the Gun Happy make on this thread.

I like to rape women, or I like women to rape me... ITS ONE OF THESE11!! lOLZ ;)

Making flippant comments about killing people is fucking pathetic. If your job (Law enforcement, military, etc) involves taking human lives, then so be it. But when you talk about it as a "perk" and use smiley emoticons to show your enthusiasm...

Well, get fucked.

. Killing people does not need to involve happiness or enjoyment to make it an art worthy of appreciation, and having people trying to kill you is part of many an occupation and actually helps to sharpen one's skills at self-preservation and survival. But then, you would know nothing of this upon that pedestal of self-righteoous acedemia

What the fuck are you going on about. Obviously these are needed skills that don't need to involve happiness, but he's talking about killing people like it's a fucking job benefit. Get off my nuts and stop being so fucking dense for christ's sake.

YOu are still a douche.. I already said I miss read the sentence. Get over your self. God damn liberals can be such pussies.

And neo-cons retarded cocks.

And neo-cons retarded cocks.

Is that one that stays floppy? :devil

Ignore Osg.

His sole purpose for posting here is try to convince someone that he is tough.

I dont know if he is or not, and I dont really care. At this point its just boring and predictable.

OH no.. your an idiot too I see. Gosh what a surprise. I don't know what you're on my ass about l2 I know you can't help the way you are, but I don't judge you.

'OH no.. your an idiot too I see'

- It's just too easy :(

I'm sorry Halo. Can you please forgive me? I forgot you're perfect. You've never posted a response in a hurry and didn't bother proof reading it? No no.. Of course not because you're perfect.

Halo, if you haven't learned by now, Osg is not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed....

me more smartz then moster...

this is a great little top 10...

http://www.arthurshall.com/x_2007_manly_firearms.shtml

I'm going to ignore the last few pages of retard fighting and ask a different question...

Even though it makes little sense, the looming Obama administration was enough to finally get me to go out and get that taken care of.

Can someone explain this for me? I've heard it a ton since he got elected and as stated, it makes no sense. If you like collecting armor piercing assault rifles, then sure I can see why you'd want to buy one in the next year. But handguns? The idea that a politician at Obama's level would essentially commit political suicide by claiming we should repeal the 2nd amendment is baffling.

Buying a handgun because Obama's getting elected makes about as much sense as buying a christmas tree or a bottle of orange juice because Obama's getting elected.

makes about as much sense as banning an AR-15 because it "looks military" when I can do far far more with a good rifle and scope. Rationality on the issue on either side is not common.

makes about as much sense as banning an AR-15 because it "looks military" when I can do far far more with a good rifle and scope. Rationality on the issue on either side is not common.

The issue is not that a weapon looks "military" but in the amount of rounds available before the need to reload, as you probably have seen in tight situations some people get almost panicked when they have to reload.

Men just need excuses to buy cool toys.


It has nothing to do with Obama imo.

Can someone explain this for me? I've heard it a ton since he got elected and as stated, it makes no sense. If you like collecting armor piercing assault rifles, then sure I can see why you'd want to buy one in the next year. But handguns? The idea that a politician at Obama's level would essentially commit political suicide by claiming we should repeal the 2nd amendment is baffling.

Buying a handgun because Obama's getting elected makes about as much sense as buying a christmas tree or a bottle of orange juice because Obama's getting elected.

There's a lot of gray area between the extreme you're choosing to argue against and where we're at now. For example: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

That bill would affect (from the bill):

`(i) any handgun; or

`(ii) any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device

There's a lot of gun grabbers in Congress (and Obama's administration) that are salivating at the chance to run as much legislation through as possible now that the opportunity has presented itself.

I suppose you're right that it's not specifically Obama. I oversimplified when I said that. It's the entire incoming Legislative and Executive branches that worry me, not just him.

You heard it here first folks! Obama will ban oj and Christmas trees - stock up while you can!

He can have Christmas...

right but then again Rover you of all people should know what a little practice with a good bolt action rifle can do. Might not be able to spray and pray, but far more lethal and fro ma greater distance in most cases.

right but then again Rover you of all people should know what a little practice with a good bolt action rifle can do. Might not be able to spray and pray, but far more lethal and fro ma greater distance in most cases.

Brings to mind that great line from full metal jacket about Lee Harvey Oswald.:D

Guns, common sense and the average american rarely go hand in hand.
A friend recently bought a .45 and then had a laser sight installed.
he got a little pissed when i told him if hes trying hit something at 20 yards or more with a .45 he has no clue how to use a gun and if he cant hit something at less than 10 yards with a .45 without a laser sight he has no business owning a gun.

I'm not going to win any competitions, but I'll take it for my first time.

Not bad at all. you tend low left. compensate.

right but then again Rover you of all people should know what a little practice with a good bolt action rifle can do. Might not be able to spray and pray, but far more lethal and fro ma greater distance in most cases.

Hey I didn't say they are right, I was just pointing out their stated reasoning. I know if I was going to take someone "out" it would be at least 300 meters and with a scoped rifle.


Brings to mind that great line from full metal jacket about Lee Harvey Oswald.:D



HAHA...they actually do that kind of stuff at Parris Island.

HAHA, i live my life with very few rules and restrictions. one is never fuck with a current or former marine. odds are they were batshit crazy bastards before they ever signed on the dotted line.

That and their heads fit in the jar.

I'm not going to win any competitions, but I'll take it for my first time.

The question of the day is...which one is the hole from the first round?

It was in the punched out area. In the upper left of the red.

My first clip was actually one of the best, until I settled down. It kicked a lot more than I expected for a 9mm.

The argument regarding AR-15's and similar "military-style" weapons is that those are the ones the gang-bangers tend to move toward and use on their criminal enterprises and drive-bys. The idea put forth had more to do, as Rover was alluding to, with the number of rounds available.

It is obvious to anyone who has been involved with weapons that a good rifle and scope kicks the crap out of any automatic/semi-automatic weapon, but the people that were being targeted by the gun control measure were not usually found assuming the role of a sniper.

I seem to remember a saying about snipers being 10 times more dangerous than any Rambo-wannabe.

"1 shot, 1 kill" I believe is the phrase.

Chain mail I got this morning: No time to check facts but hey interesting.

Australian Gun Law Update
Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts

From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia

Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the now available data from Down Under. It has now been one year (12 months) since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program cos ting Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now available:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent;

Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;

Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent);

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent as compared with the last one year period when private ownership of a firearm was legal.

(NB: the law-abiding citizens did turn in their personal firearms, the criminal element did not and thus criminals in Australia still possess their guns.)

While data for the 25 years preceding the confiscation of privately owned guns showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months as criminals now are assured their victims will be unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns.'

This story of well intentioned government intervention in the rights of lawful individuals to own and possess firearms won't be seen in the mainstream US media or on the American evening news. Senator Obama who advocates a similar confiscation in the US will not be reporting any of this to you.

But, the Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

Snopes..ROFL

Interesting statistics. "Inconclusive" is the best way to put a reasonable assessment on what is being presented.

One has to ask if such a measure would be put forth to legislation and enacted here in the States would it be worth the expense of repealing an amendment written as part of The Bill of Rights in addition to the costs of buying back the weapons. Unless crime dramatically was reduced as a result, the precedent of a successful assault on the Bill of Rights would put the whole document in jeopardy. The Patriot act has already strained it and allowing one right to fall might pave the way for other rights to fall in the guise of "Looking out for the best interests of the public and public safety". Liberty incures some risks, and we can live in a risk free society if we so choose, but liberty will be restricted. Take your pick.

I don't belong to the NRA or any lobby of that sort, but when I took the oath to support and defend the Constitution, well that document should not be trifled with so easy. Thankfully there doesn't seem to be a big push to do away with the Second Amendment. The Guns = Crime approach is a cop out if anything. The social and demographic problems at the root of crime could be addressed first with the huge amount of money that would have to be laid out repealing the 2nd Amendment or even just a modest buy back program from legal, registered owners. I don't want to part with my guns, and I would want their full value in compensation.

That is unless of course it was presented as a "take the money now for them or go to jail when private gun ownership becomes illegal" case. Then I might have to think about all the other things wrong with the US and is it worth continuing to live here when I see rights going away but little improvement in other areas, such as infrastructure, schools and health care.

Gun manufactures, hunters, marksmen etc would all pitch a stink about it and that means time in the courts. Unless, of course, we want to get rid of the 5th, 7th and the 10th Amendment first.

Snopes..ROFL

Whole helluva lot more accurate than some random chain email.

The they want to take our guns shit is just that...shit. It won't happen, will never happen and the people who advocate no one owning guns is such a small segment of the population it is almost immeasurable.

The whole issue is simply a much blown out of proportion issue much like flag burning, single mothers and the other darlings of the right.

/shrug. I know its shit. Its just an interesting case study. That's all.

The US would probably be alot more ban/legislate this and that out of existence happy if we didn't have the Bill of Rights. The EU is banning plasma TVs and 100 watt incandescent light bulbs just to throw out an example. Next year they are banning the color blue which means they have to change their flag. Perhaps red would be better? (not true but come on, EU. WTF.) In the US its more a case if you don't want to pay for the extra electricity, than buy a weaker bulb (maybe a screw in florescent?) or an LCD screen (which also last longer too). Oh, that and turn them off when you are not using them helps on the bill too. Other countries just go off the rails and ban shit outright regardless if the market phases them out on their own. It makes you wonder if it even makes a degree of sense sometimes.

Hey I support single mothers 100%.

http://www.angelzfunnyz.com/Portals/0/Gallery/Album/4/Support%20Single%20Moms.jpg

The they want to take our guns shit is just that...shit. It won't happen, will never happen and the people who advocate no one owning guns is such a small segment of the population it is almost immeasurable.

Like how they'd never eviscerate the 4th Amendment? Patriot Act, anyone?

The 1st is untouchable, right? As long as you're in a "free speech zone".

When things turned ugly in New Orleans, they rushed in and seized guns in a heartbeat. Didn't matter if you were trying to protect yourself from the actual criminals or not, they took every gun they could find.

This has happened in the wake of other disasters too recently. Google around about the gun confiscations after a series of tornadoes in Kansas.

Hopefully, you're right that it's nothing to worry about. I think it's a mistake to assume that it's an immeasurable fringe that would support a gun ban though. Especially if the economy continues to tank and rising violence lends more (falsely placed) credibility to the notion.

This just in criminals are still criminals. Good thing the honest folks are now unprotected!

The very definition of a government, in even its most base terms, means an entity that has a monopoly on the use of force.

Yes, every single government ever known to man will take the ability to use violence away from you. Think of it this way, self defense is when you act in a situation where the government cannot protect your life. In situations where there has been some event that causes the omnipresence of government, such as a natural disaster, the government will re exert its monopolistic control.

The baseline reality is that all governments have a set of natural laws that are its primary drive. The second amendment is great, but when it comes into conflict with the natural state of a government, the second amendment, or any amendment, will lose.

The crocodile will always be a crocodile.

That sounds like a hoity-toity, drawn-out way of saying "yeah, they'll take your means of defense when you need it most."

The very definition of a government, in even its most base terms, means an entity that has a monopoly on the use of force.

Yes, every single government ever known to man will take the ability to use violence away from you. Think of it this way, self defense is when you act in a situation where the government cannot protect your life. In situations where there has been some event that causes the omnipresence of government, such as a natural disaster, the government will re exert its monopolistic control.

The baseline reality is that all governments have a set of natural laws that are its primary drive. The second amendment is great, but when it comes into conflict with the natural state of a government, the second amendment, or any amendment, will lose.

The crocodile will always be a crocodile.

That might very well be why the second amendment is there. Might be the point in which , the people say no.

Red Dawn....

That is all!!

Wolverines!!!!!

'This just in criminals are still criminals. Good thing the honest folks are now unprotected!'

- We have criminals too, but we're not armed to the teeth and yet still somehow have a lower crime rate than yourselves. The entire point of my argument is that buying a gun obviously does not make you Yanks any safer.

Red Dawn....

That is all!!

Wolverines!!!!!


LOL...once again I just watched that on On Demand....classic!

I had the dubious fortune of seeing that in the theatre, on an illicit date. I seem to have a knack for picking the worst date movies ever... ;)

'This just in criminals are still criminals. Good thing the honest folks are now unprotected!'

- We have criminals too, but we're not armed to the teeth and yet still somehow have a lower crime rate than yourselves. The entire point of my argument is that buying a gun obviously does not make you Yanks any safer.

So does Australia, yet they have a higher rate of violent crimes. Hmm.

If the guns cause the crime, why isn't Switzerland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland) overrun with gun crime? Someone brought that up already in this thread, but it was conveniently ignored.

If the guns cause the crime, why isn't Switzerland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland) overrun with gun crime?

No single mothers?

I had the dubious fortune of seeing that in the theatre, on an illicit date. I seem to have a knack for picking the worst date movies ever... ;)

illicit? do tell :)

I'd say they are way off course....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39CQBFv6N68

So does Australia, yet they have a higher rate of violent crimes. Hmm.

Well, heck, the country started out as a penal colony for the miscreants of England so what do you expect. :p

Might explain why crime rates are so low in England, they exported all their miscreants.

Seems I remember reading something about a guy from Australia who was trying to explain why Australians are different, to a Yank. The way he put it, England took all thier miscreants, and put them on a long voyage, far away from "proper society." What England failed to realize, was they were actually shipping them from a cold, wet, dark environment, to a tropical paradise.

Now, who do you think really made out best in that deal?

Just as an FYI, asking if the criminal record is still required for entry does not make them laugh.

Just as an FYI, asking if the criminal record is still required for entry does not make them laugh.Put that in the same category as asking people in Florida if they've figured out how to vote. No sense of humor!

Put that in the same category as asking people in Florida if they've figured out how to vote. No sense of humor!


LOL, if we are just talking about dumb questions now, imagine how often I hear "Is it cold enough for ya?" up here in Minnesota during the winter while delivering mail.

I think there should be a list out there of jokes not to make. When I worked in a restaurant I got sick of morons coming in thinking they were funny by telling me 30 people were coming in, when it was just 2. Yes, I heard that today. 8 times.

Followed by, after the smoking ban, requests for the smoking section followed by, "just kidding! hurk hurk, I know we can't do that now."

I hate it when someone tells me they are "Computer Illiterate". What does that mean, exactly? You can't read a computer?

Means they like posting on internet forums.

It can't be the amount of guns owned by American citizen's that is the cause of the crime. Per capita, Canadians own FAR more guns and rifles than our cousins to the south, but yet (again per captia) we have far less gun crime. Gotta be something else.

Gotta be something else

Drugs+Ignorance= ..........................?

Are you just guessing Bin? Because I have never seen anything say what you are stating:


The United States has the highest rate of gun ownership in the world at 90 firearms per 100 citizens, a recent survey found.

According to the 2007 Small Arms Survey, released Aug. 28, the United States, with less than 5 percent of the world's population, owns about 35 to 50 percent of the world's civilian-owned guns.

United States civilians are responsible for the ownership of 270 million firearms, out of a total of 650 million civilian-owned firearms worldwide. Civilian ownership accounts for about 75 percent of total firearms owned, the survey reported.

Canadians also have free health care and free college education so they have nothing to be pissed off about. :)

Seriously though, while poverty is a tough thing to measure they also have anywhere from 3% to 8% less than us, depending on who you talk to. Not to mention if you have health care and education taken care of, being poor there isn't as bad as being poor here.

I love Canada, just stating I have never read nor heard that Canadians have more guns per capita.

Might explain why crime rates are so low in England, they exported all their miscreants.

Seems I remember reading something about a guy from Australia who was trying to explain why Australians are different, to a Yank. The way he put it, England took all thier miscreants, and put them on a long voyage, far away from "proper society." What England failed to realize, was they were actually shipping them from a cold, wet, dark environment, to a tropical paradise.

Now, who do you think really made out best in that deal?

hate to break it to you, but australia is neither tropical nor a paradise.

hate to break it to you, but australia is neither tropical nor a paradise.


LOL...very true...I think about 80-85% of it is arid dry hot and unforgiving...the outback.

Hehe, well it averages out to about 6 weapons per citizen. Some people up here are VERY serious about their collections. Granted, most of the weapons are hunting rifles and shotguns (LOTS of good hunting up here given the amount of unmolested natural habitat), but whether it's a hand gun or a shotgun or a 306, it'll put a hole in someone LOL.

There are confusing stats apparently. I saw a site claiming the Canadian per capita ownership of guns was only .25 where it is over .8 in the US.

Who the hell knows?

I'm pretty sure a fair percentage of firearms go unreported in both countries. Some of my weapons are old enough they don't appear on any registration database. A couple were black powder kits for which records aren't kept at all.

This kind of mutes the crime argument, it doesn't take a gun to wreak havoc and tragedy.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/01/23/belgium.nursery.attack/index.html

hate to break it to you, but australia is neither tropical nor a paradise.

http://rainforest-australia.com/

Nothing tropical nor beautiful in Australia....:rolleyes:

And before the interior was explored, Australia was thought to be one, big, lush tropical island with an inland sea in the middle of it.

I'm not saying the quote was accurate, just parroting the story I heard.

Rover, watch out, Knives will be next on the "No No" list!

There's a lot of gray area between the extreme you're choosing to argue against and where we're at now. For example: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

That bill would affect (from the bill):



There's a lot of gun grabbers in Congress (and Obama's administration) that are salivating at the chance to run as much legislation through as possible now that the opportunity has presented itself.

I suppose you're right that it's not specifically Obama. I oversimplified when I said that. It's the entire incoming Legislative and Executive branches that worry me, not just him.


I'm not arguing against anything. :p Thanks for the info, but I seem to get an error when I click on anything in that link, what exactly would that bill do?

Looks like a buddy is giving me a .357 Magnum. Yay me. Should stop any crazy's breaking in. Theres a bit of a meth problem out here.

http://www.capachat.com/im/articles/capachat_colt_python-357-Magnum180362.jpg

Plus, if you decide to knock over a liquor store, you won't have to worry about leaving any casings behind.

Now this is what I am talking about...

http://www.mossberg.com/JIC.htm

Plus, if you decide to knock over a liquor store, you won't have to worry about leaving any casings behind.

Hey another up side!

I still think I would like to get a Mossberg for my mother, since she is home alone all night several times a week.

Now this is what I am talking about...

http://www.mossberg.com/JIC.htm

You know what, a shoulder gun without a stock is retarded and is sold purely on looks. I would hate to be above any person who is fireing that in a shitty situation.

You know what, a shoulder gun without a stock is retarded and is sold purely on looks. I would hate to be above any person who is fireing that in a shitty situation.

it's not that bad at all really and the cruisers are very maneuverable. Excellent home gun.

Looks like a buddy is giving me a .357 Magnum. Yay me. Should stop any crazy's breaking in. Theres a bit of a meth problem out here.

http://www.capachat.com/im/articles/capachat_colt_python-357-Magnum180362.jpg


This is a nice weapon, and has the plus of not having any hot shell casings flying about in close quarters. And, when in close combat where a handgun is being used (seeing as sawed off shotguns are illegal) the stopping power of the .357 offsets the limited number of rounds, as compared to automatics with larger capacity clips.

Revolvers are a hell of a lot more reliable too.

Revolvers are a hell of a lot more reliable too.

"And is heavy, if it jams, you can always hit him with it!"

Having pistol whipped someone before, you'd be surprised how effective it can be.

Yeah I imagine getting hit in the head/face with steel would be effective.

Has anyone ever checked out the Norinco 982 12g ? It is a Chinese made shotgun but it has double rails (that is what I call them) and ghost sights come with it.... it is a clone of the 870.

Five years ago you could get them for about 140 bucks which is an incredible steal. Now they go for about 220 ish....

I have read nothing but good reveiws with the exception of changing the screw that holds the read site , you should lock tite it so you don't lose it...


http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii299/MAX100/GCMT-1.jpg

Thanks for the suggestion, I have been looking for a shotgun.

This is what I ended up getting.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/ruger_gp100_4in_357fl.jpg

Chanur, you did the right thing. You really can't go wrong with a revolver. I am getting two more .357's and will down load two of them to .38 cal rounds so wife and boys can handle it. I will keep mine with the full .357 rounds.

For me the pistols are side/back up arms.

I just picked up a 20ga OLD Remington Model 11 with manuf date of Sept of '48.... It's an autoloader.. the neat part is it's recoil and not gas operated..

'so wife and boys can handle it.'

- God that's worrying. How old are your boys?

'so wife and boys can handle it.'

- God that's worrying. How old are your boys?

Better they know and respect firearms than not, Halo. Less chance of accidents.

'so wife and boys can handle it.'

- God that's worrying. How old are your boys?

We were routinely given shotguns, unsupervised, when I was as young as 10. The world is full of dangerous things, the best way to accommodate that is education.

'We were routinely given shotguns, unsupervised, when I was as young as 10'

- Yay?

Dear Halo:

I was a crack shot with a .22 rifle by the age of 12 (trained on targets and 'vermin', aka squirrels), and I was a tiny girl for my age. My father drilled into me at an early age that guns were dangerous, that you didn't point one at anyone, *ever*, even if you 'knew' it was empty, and while I'm somewhat less comfortable with the idea of children handling handguns, I think it's far better, if you're at all contemplating having firearms in the house, to make sure every member of the family is educated about them, including, once they are old enough, how to use them so that they don't accidentally, or otherwise, injure themselves or others.

Regards,
Nydia

The cultural mentality is too wide a gap, I guess, for acceptance of those kind of measures. Kids? Guns? Just sends a shudder.

Kids love to shoot guns, nothing wrong with it. I'll admit though when I see pictures taken in SouthAmerica/Africa and 8-12 year olds walking around with fully automatic machine guns, and army fatigues on...that sends a shudder through me.

Bise, why buy chinese, get a Remington or Mossburg.

probably the neatness factor...

Bise, why buy chinese, get a Remington or Mossburg.

Indeed. At least buy one of the few things the US still makes!

If you want made in China, go to Walmart.

The cultural mentality is too wide a gap, I guess, for acceptance of those kind of measures. Kids? Guns? Just sends a shudder.

Definitely a cultural gap there. I've met a couple adult British ex-pats here who absolutely were terrified of guns. One of them has since overcome that phobia, but the other positively freaks in the presence of an admitted gun owner, let alone a gun itself.

I was about 13 when I was taught to handle forearms and shot .22's competitively for a couple of years after that (always under adult supervision). I was around 15 when I took up hunting and at that point I no longer was supervised.

IMO the real problem comes when you get yahoos who buy a firearm the minute they turn of legal age and think that they know how to use/keep one safely without ever actually having had any formal training. I would not be at all adverse to requiring proof of training before allowing someone to buy a firearm.

Kids? Guns? Just sends a shudder.

Kids? Cars? Pools? Horses? Medicine? Stairs? Cleaning supplies? Cricket bats? My First Chemistry Set?

The list of things you can injure yourself with is endless. In virtually all other cases, we address the danger to ourselves by learning, or at least training, about how to deal with the dangers. In a minority of cases, we try to legislate the dangerous things out of the picture, with random results.

I get a shudder every time I venture outside my professional area and meet a swelling army of people who have no training or education pursuant to any real, physical endeavor -- reminds me of the ship of idiots from the Hitchhiker's Guide.

Halo, I don't know if you realize this or not, but firearms always have been, and probably always will be an integral part of this country's make up.

Would you advocate not teaching children about the things Malse listed, because they are dangerous?

More often than not, accidental firearms deaths come from people that had little or no training, trying to 'show off'.

And banning guns probably wouldn't do any good. As the killer in the story I posted in the other thread showed, a knife can be just as effective in killing people.

Just to send a shudder down Halo's spine how old were we all when we were taught to shoot? I was 9.

10, and was given a part time job shooting pigeons out of the rafters in the barn of a locale pig farmer.

Kids love to shoot guns, nothing wrong with it. I'll admit though when I see pictures taken in SouthAmerica/Africa and 8-12 year olds walking around with fully automatic machine guns, and army fatigues on...that sends a shudder through me.

Bise, why buy chinese, get a Remington or Mossburg.

Believe me I am all about Mossburg's... it is just the Norinco has two (and I don't know the exact name of the part) rods that the pump slides on vs the one made on the 870 models.

ALso the trigger guard is metal vs the plastic on 870

Also, the iron/steel ghost sights are standard. That would cost over 100 bucks to buy and mount on an 870.

I may still go with a youth 870 because I can't find the norinco in a 20 gauge right now. MY FFL is looking for me.

Overall you get much more for your money in this particular cross section of what I'm looking for....

I could see where Halo would think we are kind of wierd but it is part of our culture.... just like Rugby is "fun" over there.... we like to shoot stuff :)

Pre-teen my friends and I would would grab what ever gun we had in the house and all hit the woods.... we were never hunting but killed the occasional bird or rat... at 11 or 12 we would make it to a near by river and shoot and swap guns with each other until we were out of ammy then we would pull out our sling shots and keep going :)

That was fun, and we never came close to killing each other (that I can remember).

I shot a hand gun around 11. But really had not done much shooting after that till boot. I have never shot anything and have very little desire to do so. I would how ever if needed.

I used to go to the Beverly Hills Gun club with my dad when I was about 13 years old. Some of my fondest memories of my childhood actually. Was great learning how to use them correctly and fire them accurately.

I started around 8 or so, we had a range in our basement for a 22.
I started hunting at 10 and stopped after I left the service.
Also shot on the Winchester Skeet team way back when as a teenager.

'Just to send a shudder down Halo's spine how old were we all when we were taught to shoot? I was 9.'

- I'm having shudder convulsions!

My father taught me to shoot around 9 or 10, out in the forest.

Lately one of the arguments being posited by gun control advocates is that the US supply of firearms is responsible for the massive violent crime problem just south of our border. Several politicians have come out saying that 90 percent of the guns used haved been smuggled to Mexico from the US.

I just read this rebuttal and found it interesting....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/

Holy cripes does anyone else feel every day lost in the what to to believe realm? You have people on both sides of every issue spouting facts, I just have no clue who is right.

AK-47 is one of the chief weapons used by elements that skirt legal purchase. Far as I know we don't produce those in America. Read a few articles that discussed the 90% number of guns in Mexico being purchased in the US was actually closer to 20%(?).

Holy cripes does anyone else feel every day lost in the what to to believe realm? You have people on both sides of every issue spouting facts, I just have no clue who is right.

Well if the opposing view is coming from Fox News, you can pretty much discount it's validity.

Well if the opposing view is coming from Fox News, you can pretty much discount it's validity.

That's as fucking stupid to say as the very statement you uttered.

If you clam their bias makes all their news reports as bunk then your own bias debunks your own claim.

There's plenty of non fox sites one can check for facts.

That's as fucking stupid to say as the very statement you uttered.

If you clam their bias makes all their news reports as bunk then your own bias debunks your own claim.

There's plenty of non fox sites one can check for facts.

Fox news is a vehicle to promote the beliefs of one Rupert Murdoch, and of the Republican party.

Yes, I will question anything coming from a company that wishes to promote their own beliefs. MSNBC for instance, holds a bias point of view due to the beliefs of its anchors. They can believe what they want, They are not trying to make me believe the same with falsehoods.

Fox news is a vehicle to promote the beliefs of one Rupert Murdoch, and of the Republican party.

Yes, I will question anything coming from a company that wishes to promote their own beliefs.

I absolutely agree with this sentiment. I try to read news from a variety of sources with this in mind (including *gasp* Fox News). However dismissing out of hand is not the same as questioning.

I absolutely agree with this sentiment. I try to read news from a variety of sources with this in mind (including *gasp* Fox News). However dismissing out of hand is not the same as questioning.

I have tried to use Fox news for information as well, however I have seen the most insane slants on a story from Fox news. It is ridiculous how much they can skew a story while still reporting a tiny amount of facts.

http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m4d1-Mexican-drug-cartels-do-not-need-US-gun-shops-to-arm-themselves

..

Or you can take this article with points out that the ATF offers no proof for the 90% claim

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/outposts/2009/04/will-mexicos-drug-war-lead-to-tighter-gun-control-laws-in-us.html

Truth is the 90% claim was made by Mexico's President and many folks have jumped on the number. It's also his view that most of Mexico's problems are because of other countries never their own. It has nothing to do with a govt and military that are rife with corruption to a point you have to wonder who's working for who.

For those that don't want to read the BATFE information, the quick summary is that 90% of the weapons handed over by Mexico as suspect US weapons are, including military hardware that was left in Nicaragua twenty years ago, which accounts for around a fourth of weapon seizures in Mexico. So the smuggling problem on our border accounts for ~22% of weapons, and virtually none of the serious ones like RPGs and machine guns.



Most of these weapons are being smuggled from Central American countries or by sea, eluding U.S. and Mexican monitors who are focused on the smuggling of semiauto- matic and conventional weapons purchased from dealers in the U.S. border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.


The proliferation of heavier armaments points to a menacing new stage in the Mexican government's 2-year-old war against drug organizations, which are evolving into a more militarized force prepared to take on Mexican army troops, deployed by the thousands, as well as to attack each other.

These groups appear to be taking advantage of a robust global black market and porous borders, especially between Mexico and Guatemala. Some of the weapons are left over from the wars that the United States helped fight in Central America, U.S. officials said.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-mexico-arms-race15-2009mar15,0,229992.story

I knew when I saw the explosion of poorly cited stories about gun smuggling, versus you know, NONE from 2001-January 2009, that something weird was up.

If there is a new law in here, it should be that we should stop arming Central American anti-Communists (duh?). Thanks Ollie North, your gift keeps on giving.

That inflammatory headline was front and center of the San Antonio paper day before yesterday as well. Yes, gun smuggling across our southern border is a problem, but this is hardly a new problem (I mentioned a while back in a discussion of the border the wife of a weapons trafficker to South America, where the money is, showing off their home for the Laredo society page five or six years ago) and it's *not* where the bazooka came from that blew up an armored police vehicle in spectacular fashion (audible from my classroom ;) ) in 2005 - that was stolen Mexican military issue.

A friend and I chatted the other day about what, and whose, agenda might be behind the sudden media and other urgency about gun smuggling into Mexico - and I think the impetus is twofold; 1) it gives the Obama administration a plausible (or less unpalatable to his party) pretext for increased securitization of the border than the issue of illegal immigration and the flagging 'war on drugs' - and 2) it enables him to press for stricter gun control laws, particularly with regard to the 'gun show loophole' issue. As his predecessor aptly demonstrated, if you want to advance an an unpopular or dubious agenda, make an emergency out of it... ;)

Note: I'm not by any means saying there isn't a serious gun violence problem across our southern border, nor that most of those firearms didn't get there from the US by some path or other, but this isn't a 'sudden' emergency by any means, and I think that knee-jerk attempts to stem the flow via the South Texas border checkpoints is going to be largely ineffectual, just as that silly and flimsy fence is.

Regards,
Nydia

Holy cripes does anyone else feel every day lost in the what to to believe realm? You have people on both sides of every issue spouting facts, I just have no clue who is right.

Neither side is completely right, of course.

Fox news is a vehicle to promote the beliefs of one Rupert Murdoch, and of the Republican party.

Yes, I will question anything coming from a company that wishes to promote their own beliefs. MSNBC for instance, holds a bias point of view due to the beliefs of its anchors. They can believe what they want, They are not trying to make me believe the same with falsehoods.

For gods sake it's run by Roger Ailes, I doubt you will see anymore bias than that.

LOL. People at work call Fox News " That right wing newsite" And whats amazing is most of my co-workers regardless of where I have been assigned have been staunch Republicans ( most of the military is ) since half of them seem to be from either Texas or Oklahoma and yet they still find Fox News to be too right for their tastes. In a nutshell, I work with 100s of copies of Osg from the political standpoint, and they all view McCain losing as a huge injustice. Its fun to tell them I didn't bother to vote in the last election since I like have my opinions be uninfluenced by the stupidity of politics. Usually shuts them right up. One thing that IS a problem is that the military, which tended to be somewhat racially tolerant, has lost some ground as a result of Obama winning. African American members and Hispanics threw in with Obama while the rest were pretty quick to play up the stereotypes, such as pictures of the Oval office with Obama serving global leaders a bucket of KFC and plates of watermelon.

Back on topic, I tend to check out all 3 of the big ones, which are Fox, CNN and BBC. From that I can draw my own conclusions.

If you ever want to feel better about your own cognitive abilities, kick back for about 10 minutes of "fox news and friends" and see one of the weirdest echo-chamber circlejerks. I think the plasticized bimbo has to eat the biscuit afterwards.

OK guys, I think you've all gone to a weird place.

Well Halo, the thing you just have to realize is its a vast cultural difference. The United States in 2005 (best data I could find) had 30,694 deaths or roughly 10 deaths per 100,000 citizens. In 2000 this number was about 14 deaths per 100,000 citizens. Also of note, nearly 60% (56.5%) of these are suicides. All statistics from US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

European data is tougher to find but I found this chart here:
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html

This chart compares US and European firearm homicides and suicides back in 1994/1993. Its obvious most countries in Europe are dramatically lower (France with only .44 citizens per 100,000 or 8x less than in the United States, your England even dramatically less).

But with that in mind, Europe carries 15 out of 100,000 citizens more smoking deaths per year than the United States, a larger number than all of our firearm fatalities combined. The numbers only seem dramatic when you analyze them up close - never mind that 2 out of every 3 firearm deaths in the US are either drug related or suicides (there's a bunch of threads on this very forum about the drug issue in progress - and as callously as it will sound, I don't feel that bad when one drug dealer shoots another drug dealer). Very rarely is it the children of Bise on a shooting rampage - despite what makes it to the 6 o'clock news.

I don't have a gun, I don't want a gun, but there are certainly a lot worse things to be worried about.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7982444.stm

- Yeah, sure.
From the article:

'RECENT US SHOOTINGS
March 2009: A gunman kills a total of 11 people in a series of shootings southern Alabama
Dec 2008: A gunman dressed as Santa Claus kills nine people and himself on Christmas Eve in LA
Sept 2008: Six people die in a series of shootings in the north-west of Washington state
June 2008: A worker at a plastics plant in Kentucky kills five people before killing himself
Apr 2007: 32 people and the gunman die at the Virginia Tech campus'

'Very rarely is it the children of Bise on a shooting rampage'

- That's the funniest part of your post, even though I love ya.

Halo, and this might burn a bit, there is something you need to understand in our difference(s).

Your society has had it bred into them to allow the Royals, or designated few, to take upon themselves the duties of protecting thier smallfolk.

We, however, are born of a people that had to scratch and fight and tame not only a land we ran to because we wanted to live on our own but also your Royals that wanted to oppress us with thier desire to maintain thier status quo.

Different world bruddah, we're just a bit more willing to take upon ourselves the need to defend our rights. I prefer our climate as opposed to your sedate happiness that even your govt will always do what's right. We've an ace in the hole over here in the event that ours doesn't do the same. Hell we're also quite happy to take up arms to throw back any fool that thinks coming in here and taking our rights will be a pat thing.

Halo, and this might burn a bit, there is something you need to understand in our difference(s).

Your society has had it bred into them to allow the Royals, or designated few, to take upon themselves the duties of protecting thier smallfolk.

We, however, are born of a people that had to scratch and fight and tame not only a land we ran to because we wanted to live on our own but also your Royals that wanted to oppress us with thier desire to maintain thier status quo.

Different world bruddah, we're just a bit more willing to take upon ourselves the need to defend our rights. I prefer our climate as opposed to your sedate happiness that even your govt will always do what's right. We've an ace in the hole over here in the event that ours doesn't do the same. Hell we're also quite happy to take up arms to throw back any fool that thinks coming in here and taking our rights will be a pat thing.

this post is hilarious on oh so many levels.

If you were a tidge more braindead they'd kick your ass out of the soup line and expect you to dig latrine ditches for your crust.

Zip it ya worthless bastard, you've not been worth the dribble on the inside of that trollop of a mother's leg for quite some time.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7982444.stm

- Yeah, sure.
From the article:

'RECENT US SHOOTINGS
March 2009: A gunman kills a total of 11 people in a series of shootings southern Alabama
Dec 2008: A gunman dressed as Santa Claus kills nine people and himself on Christmas Eve in LA
Sept 2008: Six people die in a series of shootings in the north-west of Washington state
June 2008: A worker at a plastics plant in Kentucky kills five people before killing himself
Apr 2007: 32 people and the gunman die at the Virginia Tech campus'

'Very rarely is it the children of Bise on a shooting rampage'

- That's the funniest part of your post, even though I love ya.

You can find a few dozen people killed a year out of a population of 300 million, great job. Now go back and read the rest of my post.

I used to go to the Beverly Hills Gun club with my dad when I was about 13 years old. Some of my fondest memories of my childhood actually. Was great learning how to use them correctly and fire them accurately.


Jedd do you ever see any stars or famous people living in LA? I bet that is pretty cool when you do...

If you were a tidge more braindead they'd kick your ass out of the soup line and expect you to dig latrine ditches for your crust.

Zip it ya worthless bastard, you've not been worth the dribble on the inside of that trollop of a mother's leg for quite some time.

your impotent rage is, as always, hilarious, please do go on :)

Jedd do you ever see any stars or famous people living in LA? I bet that is pretty cool when you do...

I see stars all the time, it is kinda cool but in the end they are just rich people with less privacy.

I met Stanley from the Office while getting lunch the other day. He was a really nice guy...

http://blogs.mycentraljersey.com/channelsurfing/files/2009/02/stanley.jpg

I see stars all the time, it is kinda cool but in the end they are just rich people with less privacy.

I met Stanley from the Office while getting lunch the other day. He was a really nice guy...

The worst part though is when you meet someone who you are a big fan of, but then they go and act like a dick to you / in front of you. Like, I can't enjoy a Bruce Willis movie anymore after working on Die Hard.

Though this is crazy off topic :)

The worst part though is when you meet someone who you are a big fan of, but then they go and act like a dick to you / in front of you. Like, I can't enjoy a Bruce Willis movie anymore after working on Die Hard.

Though this is crazy off topic :)

I used to be a PA and it helped to go into every situation thinking they are going to be an asshole and being pleasantly surprised when they were not. :)

I met a crap load of people when I lived in LA. Keanu, Ronald Regan, Val kilmer, Corey Feldman and thats just off the top of my head. I have had pretty universally positive responses. Keanu I used to talk to every week, he was really cool.

I met Ted Danson at the hospital I work at... and saw Timberlake, Jessica Beal and a couple other actors when they were filming The Open Road here.

Poor Ted looks like shit in RL.

but he was nice :)

Id love to met Ted Danson. He is getting up there in age though. He was modeling before cheers, which started in 82 or something.

Kelraz, you had a guy dressed up as Santa, gunning people down.

That's not fucking normal dude.

Kelraz, you had a guy dressed up as Santa, gunning people down.

That's not fucking normal dude.


As opposed to a guy gunning people down while wearing jeans and a t-shirt?

Well yeah, that happens a lot too.

But fucking santa!?

But fucking santa!?

That was Lauren Graham in Bad Santa, we're talking about Die Hard here...

Kelraz, you had a guy dressed up as Santa, gunning people down.

That's not fucking normal dude.

You are right. It wasn't normal. There are a lot of crimes unrelated to guns that aren't exactly "normal", too - you know, like a truck full of fertilizer or a box cutter on an airplane, or a bunch of college students in gas masks smashing windows at the RBS just to get on TV. When you have a population of 300,000,000,000 people - its statistically impossible to not have crime. That doesn't mean if every gun in the world disappeared tomorrow, that wouldn't do anything for the rate of crime. And when you compare the actual rates to that of real problems like lack of employment and health care and poor education systems.

You take away Santa's gun, and he'll make a pipe bomb. If you give Santa a better education, some decent health care, and a job he can be proud of - maybe he won't want to die.