Abortion and Handguns

[Dunadan]

Are you saying that the 11,000 murders are NOT related to the gun laws?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Dunadan
Are you saying that the 11,000 murders are NOT related to the gun laws?

No they're not - it's related to people being criminals. Where do the criminals get the guns? They can't go into a walmart to get them or any other legitimate place - at least as long as they have a record.

I do support manditory background checks at gun shows - I think that is one thing that is missing.

Do you know what gun laws we do have? Or are you just assuming that we have lax gun laws because that's what your media reports?

State by State Gun Laws
Research Library | State Gun Laws - This is from an NRA related site - but it does go far more in depth with the various state laws.

A Citizen's Guide To Federal Firearms Laws
Under federal law supported by the National Rifle Association, the use of a firearm in a violent or drug-trafficking crime is punishable by a mandatory prison sentence of up to 20 years. A second conviction, if the firearm is a machine gun or is equipped with a silencer, brings life imprisonment without release. Violating firearms laws should lead to very real punishment for violent criminals, but the laws first must be enforced.

I think one of the things that we need to do - which a lot of congressman have stated to - is to enforce the LAWS we DO have. We have tons of gun laws already - if they aren't enforced - then we are in trouble.

I think that only American citizens should be allowed to buy guns in America. Since we don't have a national ID card - something I am against anyway - I'm not exactly sure how that would really work.

Deaths: total, total and common accidental, and firearm-related (Excel Spreadsheet)

These file -- for the U.S., the 50 states, and the District of Columbia -- contain annual statistics for total deaths, total accidental deaths, deaths due to various common types of accidents, total homicides, total suicides, and firearm-related deaths (suicides, homicides, and accidents). (Source: National Center for Health Statistics)
Accident Statistics

Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide 2000

Are UK Gun Laws Better Than US Gun Laws - I don't have the stats to back up what this person from the Daily Telegraph claims though.

We live in a freer country than Britain - and because of our freedoms - it is more of the individual's responsbility to be law abiding. We don't have security cameras watching us all over the place (although they are coming and many Americans - including me are outraged) 24/7.

Criminals break or get around laws - law abiding citizens are the ones that are restricted by them. Laws are used by government to take away the freedoms of it's citizens. It does nothing to prevent criminal behavior.

[Elven Archer]

My cousin has a friend who was in her car at a red light and these men got out of their car with bats and crow bars and stuff and started coming at her. she reached under her seat and got a gun and just put it to the window and they turned around and went back.

i haven't read this thread since i didn't read it one day and it grew 4 pages.anyway i was jsut gonna put that in so people who are dead against guns can read it. cause if she hadn't had a gun she could have been killed or raped or something.

[jerseydevil]

US politics and gun control(BBC)
...the degree of control varies from state to state.

California has limited gun sales to one firearm per customer per month and outlawed some assault weapons according to their characteristics rather than the make and model - a loophole which emerged during a previous attempt to legislate.

Illinois now requires owners to lock away firearms and fit child safety locks, the culmination of a 10-year campaign.

This article also brings up the great rallying cry for gun legistlation - namely Columbine. The thing that mostly doesn't get reported is the fact that they had tons of bombs that they were going to set off - including in the cafeteria. For some reason - I think the bombs would have caused a lot more devastation than the guns. The problem is - no one has any quick answers to deal with the bombs so it gets ignored and under reported. The guns are an easy target, but not the cause of crime.

Bombs at the School
Beginning with an initial sweep of Columbine High School, the highest priority for removal of devices initially was given to the library so that the bodies of the deceased could be removed from the scene. Second priority would be given to the cafeteria and additional areas would be assessed. This plan was followed until two bombs, with timing devices attached, were found at 5:43 p.m. in two vehicles parked in the south student parking lot, a BMW belonging to Klebold and a Honda belonging to Harris.

During the collection and handling of the explosives evidence Tuesday evening, one bomb and other devices within the bomb trailer were accidentally detonated. Two bomb technicians from the Arapahoe Sheriff’s Office were lowering a pipe bomb into the trailer when a striking match attached to the pipe bomb brushed against the trailer wall and ignited. The devices exploded within the confines of the trailer. At 10:40 p.m. April 20, the radio report of “officer down” stunned the entire law enforcement community responding to the Columbine incident. Thankfully, no one was hurt because the technicians were well trained and wearing protective bomb suits and knew to fall backward as they saw the spark from the device.

There were no injuries and no fatalities as a result of any bomb explosions.

There were a total of 76 devices found at the school, two diversionary devices, 13 devices in the suspects’ cars, and 8 more at their two homes or a total of 99 explosive devices.

The Duffel Bag Bombs
Investigators established that Harris and Klebold brought the bags containing the large propane bombs into the cafeteria and set them beside two cafeteria tables at the beginning of the first lunch period. The bombs were hidden in duffel bags so they easily blended in with the 400-plus backpacks strewn on the floor, under tables and chairs throughout the cafeteria. Most high school students carry some type of backpack. Two more bags brought in by one of their peers would not raise anyone’s suspicions.

Nearly 500 students were in the cafeteria that day. Investigators interviewed all of them at least once, but no one actually recalled either of the gunmen walking in with a duffel bag and setting them down near tables (PP and QQ) where the two normally sat with friends at lunch.

The bomb technicians discovered that the bombs were equipped with timers set to detonate at 11:17 a.m.

Columbine Report (Rocky Mountain News)

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

It's not just criminals that kill people with guns. There are accidents. There was the case in Flint, Michigan (I think it was Flint. . .) where a 6 year old (okay, forgive me if i say something innacurate this is all from memory) found a gun in his uncle's house, brought it to school and killed a 6 year old girl. He was not a criminal, he was a young child who's mother had to get up very early to take a bus to another city to work at a mall all day and come home late at night, and still she was not making enough money to pay the rent. So she was staying with her brother, where her son found a gun and brought it to school.

. . .just a thought. It's not all criminals who have guns illegally.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf
It's not just criminals that kill people with guns. There are accidents. There was the case in Flint, Michigan (I think it was Flint. . .) where a 6 year old (okay, forgive me if i say something innacurate this is all from memory) found a gun in his uncle's house, brought it to school and killed a 6 year old girl. He was not a criminal, he was a young child who's mother had to get up very early to take a bus to another city to work at a mall all day and come home late at night, and still she was not making enough money to pay the rent. So she was staying with her brother, where her son found a gun and brought it to school.

. . .just a thought. It's not all criminals who have guns illegally.

Isn't it the uncles responsibility to make sure that a 6 year old can't get a hold of his gun?

Tons of people die every year in fires that are started by children getting a hold of lighters - I don't really see the difference. Maybe we should outlaw lighters.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Isn't it the uncles responsibility to make sure that a 6 year old can't get a hold of his gun?

Tons of people die every year in fires that are started by children getting a hold of lighters - I don't really see the difference. Maybe we should outlaw lighters.

i see a difference. handguns are for killing people. quickly. lighters aren't. (no they're just for killing people veeery slowly, when used to light cigarettes...)

yes, it is the uncle's responsibility to make sure the gun is out of the way. but maybe he shouldn't have a handgun in the first place, eh? and maybe the kid's mother shouldn't have to spend all day working very hard in another town only to not be able to pay the rent so that she has to go stay with her brother who happens to have a gun. maybe she should be able to have a job that would enable her to spend more time with her kids, and make enough money to live on. but that's just not the way of the world...<sigh>

but my point was that accidents happen all the time and often it is not criminals using guns to kill people but it's accidents and other things like that. unlike you, JD i don't have all the time in the world to back up my arguments with statistics and articles, so i'll leave it at that.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf
i see a difference. handguns are for killing people. quickly. lighters aren't. (no they're just for killing people veeery slowly, when used to light cigarettes...)

yes, it is the uncle's responsibility to make sure the gun is out of the way. but maybe he shouldn't have a handgun in the first place, eh? and maybe the kid's mother shouldn't have to spend all day working very hard in another town only to not be able to pay the rent so that she has to go stay with her brother who happens to have a gun. maybe she should be able to have a job that would enable her to spend more time with her kids, and make enough money to live on. but that's just not the way of the world...<sigh>

but my point was that accidents happen all the time and often it is not criminals using guns to kill people but it's accidents and other things like that. unlike you, JD i don't have all the time in the world to back up my arguments with statistics and articles, so i'll leave it at that.

I just don't see where "accidents happening" is a good enough reason to prevent law abiding citizens from owning guns. As you said ACCIDENTS happen all the time. and not just with guns. Adults shold take responsibilty and make sure that children or others can not get a hold of dangerous items. There is too much of a mentality of "let's blame someone else" in the world and in particular in the US. All you have to do is look at the recently filed lawsuits against McDonalds. They claim McDonalds caused their obesity - yet they made the decision to eat there. It's too easy to blame others. It was the UNCLE's responsibity to make sure the 6 year old couldn't get the gun - plain and simple.

The other stuff you mentioned concerning the child's mother - has nothing to do with it. I won't even bother to comment on it.

[Nibs]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I just don't see where "accidents happening" is a good enough reason to prevent law abiding citizens from owning guns. As you said ACCIDENTS happen all the time. and not just with guns. Adults shold take responsibilty and make sure that children or others can not get a hold of dangerous items. There is too much of a mentality of "let's blame someone else" in the world and in particular in the US. All you have to do is look at the recently filed lawsuits against McDonalds. They claim McDonalds caused their obesity - yet they made the decision to eat there. It's too easy to blame others. It was the UNCLE's responsibity to make sure the 6 year old couldn't get the gun - plain and simple.

That's just what America needs... a war on ignorance...

I want to file a countersuit on McDonalds' behalf for mental anguish... I get soooo riled up when I even think about those lawsuits.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Nibs
That's just what America needs... a war on ignorance...

I want to file a countersuit on McDonalds' behalf for mental anguish... I get soooo riled up when I even think about those lawsuits.

I told my sister today that I could probably quit my job and become a billionaire if I just sue for some of things that haven't gone right in my life. I'm sure everyone else can also come up with at least 10 things that they can blame someone else for too. Just think multi-millions of dollars times 10 - sounds pretty nice.

It's the new get rich quick scheme - except people are too ignorant to see that it's really the lawyers that push a lot of these lawsuits so THEY can make millions.

[Nibs]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
It's the new get rich quick scheme - except people are too ignorant to see that it's really the lawyers that push a lot of these lawsuits so THEY can make millions.

How about a war on lawyers?

[Elven Archer]

and maybe the kid's mother shouldn't have to spend all day working very hard in another town only to not be able to pay the rent so that she has to go stay with her brother who happens to have a gun. maybe she should be able to have a job that would enable her to spend more time with her kids, and make enough money to live on. but that's just not the way of the world...<sigh>

are you trying to blame someone else on her not getting a good enough job in her own town?? that's ridiculous!! and then some.

How about a war on lawyers?

sounds good to me.

They claim McDonalds caused their obesity - yet they made the decision to eat there.

i was watching Dr.Phil and he had one of those people who claim their daughter got fat from MceeD's and he also had one of the people who had to buy and extra plane ticket cause he was so large. anyway Dr.Phil asked the lawyer what he had to say about the guy who had to buy and extra ticket and he said he was exposed to the same advertising mcdonalds puts out there. the skinny people are exposed to the same stuff! and how can a mother say her kid's fat casue she eats at Mcdonalds? she buys the food not the kid!

[LuthienTinuviel]

i am officially pulling myself from this thread.
this is JUST A THREAD remember. no need to get all jumpy and bi***y about anything on it.

sheesh, some people can just never control themselves.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by Elven Archer
are you trying to blame someone else on her not getting a good enough job in her own town?? that's ridiculous!! and then some.

it is not her fault that she couldn't get a good enough job in that town. must i go into all the details that led up her being in that situation? it's not that i'm trying to constantly blame someone else. i don't feel particuarly qualified to talk about this as i don't live there, and i don't really know enough about the issue as a whole, but it's not always someone's own fault that they can't get a decent job.

JD, perhaps you ought to think a little more about causes that are not directly related to a problem. there is usually a connection, somewhere.

LuthienTinuviel, you're right. it's just a thread. i'm getting far too crazy about this and perhaps i ought to just stop before this turns into an all out flame war, which, considering my strong feelings on the subject, it's bound to do. (at least where i'm involved) so, i'm not leaving the thread entirely, but...<sigh> i'm not going to keep arguing. i know what i think is right and i see there's no hope of convincing others who are equally set in their ways.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf
JD, perhaps you ought to think a little more about causes that are not directly related to a problem. there is usually a connection, somewhere.

There are always external problems - but it's far to easy to take the cop out and blame guns. What connection do you see - since obviously you feel I am missing something?

I can think a thousand causes that people like to blame - that are equally cop outs. Let's see - movies, music, video games, tv shows, poverty, broken homes, drugs, gangs. The list goes on and on. The truth is that people generally CHOOSE not to lock up their guns or they CHOOSE to go out and commit a crime with a gun.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

if people are going to be that irresponsible, then maybe they shouldn't be allowed to have handguns.

[Dunadan]

Interesting. Had a quick look at JD's handy guide to state gun laws; there's quite a broad range. Illinois seems to be among the strictest. However, I wouldn't call his example of limiting purchases to one a month a repressive regime.

It seems to me that the difference is: in the US you can get a gun, unless The Man can prove you shouldn't have one; in the UK, you can't have a gun, unless you can show that you really need one.

If it's criminality that is the problem, how come the death rate from guns is more than an order of magnitude greater, when the crime rate is about the same?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf
if people are going to be that irresponsible, then maybe they shouldn't be allowed to have handguns.

yeah - I guess if people are going to be irresponsible with cars - we should eliminate them or if people are going to be irresponsible when drinking we should eliminate that.

How far should big brother government get into people's lives?

I don't see a problem with requiring the government to have to prove that you can't have a gun - that is what this country is supposedly founded on. The fact that you are innocent until proven guilty. The criminals will get the guns regardless - as I've said.

Actually - there was resently an accusatin against Britain saying that they have been doctoring their crime statistics. Supposedly if a person commits several crimes - it was being counted as a single crime. You can't really compare crime statistics or any statistics unless the two you are comparing use the same formulas to come up with the numbers.

[Draken]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Actually - there was resently an accusatin against Britain

Any more problems with Britain you haven't mentioned in the Moot yet? Would hate to have missed any.


International statistics on just about anything can be misleading. Tolerance of minor crimes in particular varies, so high crime rates for assault, motoring offences etc might indicate zealous policing rather than higher criminality. But from what I can see homicide comparisons are based on a body count due to any form of unlawful killing - ie adding up deaths, not "crimes" - and so should be comparable.

You can't compare guns with cars because the purpose of cars is to get from A to B. Yes they can also be used to kill people, as can bread knives, bits or rope, a well-aimed biro etc. But that's not what they are intended to do. Guns on the other hand are intended to shoot things, and handguns are mostly intended to shoot people.

The arguments I've seen in favour of gun ownership seem to be:

The constitution says I can
They were useful in the civil war
We don't trust the federal government and might need to protect the delicate flower of American democracy with them
The bad guys have them so I need one

The last one I can understand. Maybe that does indeed outweigh any benefits from changing things. Maybe a transition from a gun-owning culture to a gun-free one would just be too difficult. I don't know, and it's not my problem.

But if hanguns aren't really the issue, what is? WHY do Americans kill each other at about five times the rate of other countries?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Draken
Any more problems with Britain you haven't mentioned in the Moot yet? Would hate to have missed any.

Well you tell me when people can stop complaining about the US. Especially since gun ownership in the US really doesn't concern anyone outside the US.

International statistics on just about anything can be misleading. Tolerance of minor crimes in particular varies, so high crime rates for assault, motoring offences etc might indicate zealous policing rather than higher criminality. But from what I can see homicide comparisons are based on a body count due to any form of unlawful killing - ie adding up deaths, not "crimes" - and so should be comparable.

You can't compare guns with cars because the purpose of cars is to get from A to B. Yes they can also be used to kill people, as can bread knives, bits or rope, a well-aimed biro etc. But that's not what they are intended to do. Guns on the other hand are intended to shoot things, and handguns are mostly intended to shoot people.

So you think by outlawing them then that criminals wouldn't be able to get them?

The arguments I've seen in favour of gun ownership seem to be:

The constitution says I can
They were useful in the civil war
We don't trust the federal government and might need to protect the delicate flower of American democracy with them
The bad guys have them so I need one

The last one I can understand. Maybe that does indeed outweigh any benefits from changing things. Maybe a transition from a gun-owning culture to a gun-free one would just be too difficult. I don't know, and it's not my problem.

You're right - it's no anyone's problem other than the US's and since most people don't understand the way our Constitution works - it is very hard for outsiders to understand. We have a WRITTEN Constitution. Neither the President nor Congress can pass anything that violates the Constitution. The President can NOT even pass anything - he can only sign into law what Congress has passed.

But if hanguns aren't really the issue, what is? WHY do Americans kill each other at about five times the rate of other countries?

That's the real question that should be asked. The US has had guns forever - is it actually more of a problem now then before? Or is it just that people look at the past through rose colored glasses. In the 1800's we had the wild west - was that a more peaceful time than now?

Why was there a wave of school shootings. With those - it was the fact that people get picked on constantly. I just don't mean a little - I mean a lot. No one wants to look at that. It's too much of a difficult problem to deal with. Also - people don't want to admit that either they or their children treat others like crap.

You can see by what are the popular shows on TV that people would rather see backstabbing and people being down right mean to each other - that society accepts it. Until society - and not through government intervention - wakes up and realises that maybe we shouldn't be so concerned about who gets kicked off of Survivor or cheers when in the movies someone gets decapitated - maybe then we will have less crime. The sniper situation wasn't so funny in real life - but I can imagine the cheers that would have been going on in the theater if it was a movie - because I've seen it happen.

I don't blame media for crime - I think media is more a reflection of society. Media reacts to what society wants. if being nice to people was more popular - you'd see more shows where people are nice to one another. Instead we have the Bachelor, Survivor, Weakest Link, etc.