about gun control [Archive]

ComradeMan

21st October 2010, 18:11

why social democrat and liberal have this weird hatred for gun possession while right winger and communist seem to be in agreement with less gun control and the right to posses one.

Guns in general are bad in my opinion but I do think gun control hysteria is stupid as well. It's not like criminals have gun licenses is it?

Perhaps they are scared of an armed population more like? :scared:

timbaly

21st October 2010, 18:22

why social democrat and liberal have this weird hatred for gun possession while right winger and communist seem to be in agreement with less gun control and the right to posses one.

I think the hatred has to with the murder rate. In the United States the states with the more lax gun laws generally have a higher gun murder rate.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000
(DC has a higher murder rate than all the states but it also has easy access to Virginia and its lax gun laws across the river)

This might explain why some people want gun laws and restrictions.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-guncontrol.htm
It deals with the correlation I mentioned above.

As for communists and right wingers I think both groups have a profound distrust in the government. Both often want the average citizen to have gun access in order to defend from government tyranny.

RGacky3

21st October 2010, 18:30

why social democrat and liberal have this weird hatred for gun possession

What??? WHere is this hatred? I never see it.

danyboy27

21st October 2010, 18:50

What??? WHere is this hatred? I never see it.

Well, in canada the NDP and the Bloc quebecois are strongly in favor of tighter gun control, same for the liberal party of canada.

In the U.S, well, its my understanding that many liberal who are voting for the democrats hate gun and seem to thing that school shootout are dirrectly linked to gun laws.

and beccause of thing, stupid right winger think that strict gun control is linked to leftism, and its making me so fucking mad.

Ele'ill

21st October 2010, 19:00

Maybe if there were less people living in absolute poverty in the United States there would be less violence.

The problem isn't the guns it's the impulse- perhaps often based on desperation- to act violently. Without guns it would simply be another weapon.

RGacky3

21st October 2010, 20:22

its my understanding that many liberal who are voting for the democrats hate gun and seem to thing that school shootout are dirrectly linked to gun laws.

I hav'nt seen that at all in the United States, its mainly a right wing strawman, I've never heard that being a realy issue on the liberal side.

stupid right winger think that strict gun control is linked to leftism, and its making me so fucking mad.

Its a strawman right wingers use, not a real argument, its like when right wingers say that the left wants open borders, its a strawman, no liberal (except for the radical left like me) argues anything close to that.

Tifosi

21st October 2010, 21:00

Without guns it would simply be another weapon.

We see this in the UK where the knife seems to be the weapon of choice for many.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/21/knives-youth-killings-weapon

UncleCyril

21st October 2010, 23:47

Salyut

21st October 2010, 23:57

Well, in canada the NDP and the Bloc quebecois are strongly in favor of tighter gun control, same for the liberal party of canada.

In the U.S, well, its my understanding that many liberal who are voting for the democrats hate gun and seem to thing that school shootout are dirrectly linked to gun laws.

and beccause of thing, stupid right winger think that strict gun control is linked to leftism, and its making me so fucking mad.

All the pro-gun lobby groups in Canada are tied to the old school Reform Party types. Shit, the one sane guy tried bringing up the Pink Pistols as possible allies and oh lord did hilarity ensue.

We're heading for a total gun ban eventually.

22nd October 2010, 00:15

I hav'nt seen that at all in the United States, its mainly a right wing strawman, I've never heard that being a realy issue on the liberal side.

no, it isn't a strawman; I hear it all the time. Liberals/Democrats in the US want restrictions on guns.

Bud Struggle

22nd October 2010, 00:31

no, it isn't a strawman; I hear it all the time. Liberals/Democrats in the US want restrictions on guns.

That's pretty much the case. The same people that won't let you eat a Big Mac or smoke cigarettes in a restaurant. They feel that people just can't be trusted to take care of themselves so they need government to make rules and guidelines to follow.

The Nanny State Liberals.

danyboy27

22nd October 2010, 00:52

All the pro-gun lobby groups in Canada are tied to the old school Reform Party types. Shit, the one sane guy tried bringing up the Pink Pistols as possible allies and oh lord did hilarity ensue.

We're heading for a total gun ban eventually.

i know there are gun lobby in canada, what a surprise!

but still, this is pretty stupid to enforce gun laws and gun ban in a countries filled with hunter and farmers.

I am personally looking foward purchasing a pistol for target practice (i have a shooting range close to where i live.) but going throught all the regulation and paperwork will take me several months.

I understand that there must be safety measure put in place but damn, i read some of the rules concerning shoulder weapon and this is ridiculous, i can own a semi auto p90 but god forbid i cant own a semi-auto m4 beccause the barrel is too big!
there are also stupid limitation about the size of the clips that just dosnt make much sense to me.

timbaly

22nd October 2010, 03:47

We see this in the UK where the knife seems to be the weapon of choice for many.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/21/knives-youth-killings-weapon

Interesting. Was the UK murder rate higher than it is now prior to the gun ban? If you look at the link below you'll see that France, Japan, Germany and the UK have much lower murder rates and also have more restrictive gun laws. I think guns in a way make it easier to kill so I believe that's one reason why countries that have high murder rates also have gun problems. Colombia, Jamaica and Mexico are all towards the bottom of the list and all have rampant gun issues. However I'm not sure if that is true for all nations at the bottom of the list.

http://www.photius.com/rankings/murder_rate_of_countries_2000-2004.html

ComradeMan

22nd October 2010, 15:19

Interesting. Was the UK murder rate higher than it is now prior to the gun ban? If you look at the link below you'll see that France, Japan, Germany and the UK have much lower murder rates and also have more restrictive gun laws. I think guns in a way make it easier to kill so I believe that's one reason why countries that have high murder rates also have gun problems. Colombia, Jamaica and Mexico are all towards the bottom of the list and all have rampant gun issues. However I'm not sure if that is true for all nations at the bottom of the list.

http://www.photius.com/rankings/murder_rate_of_countries_2000-2004.html

How many of these murder victims were killed with licensed as compared to unlicensed arms? The problem isn't just the guns it's the criminality together with the guns. Japan has probably some of the lowest rates of crime going so I think the statistical arguments may be flawed.

timbaly

22nd October 2010, 15:22

How many of these murder victims were killed with licensed as compared to unlicensed arms?

I have no idea. Those statistics are showing the murder rate not the murder by firearm rate. I couldnt even tell you how many of those murders are due to guns. I just think that there might be a a moderate correlation between gun availability and high murder rates.

ComradeMan

22nd October 2010, 15:31

Switzerland has some of the highest rates of gun ownership in Europe and quite liberal gun ownership laws compared to other European nations yet the crime rates seem relatively low.

Tifosi

22nd October 2010, 15:43

Interesting. Was the UK murder rate higher than it is now prior to the gun ban?

Well I don't really know. I'm sure the gun has never been the main weapon used in the UK. Normally it's been knife's or other house-hold objects.

'Gun sports' have historically been seen as something that the upper-classes do. What the rich do at the weekend, come up here to the Scottish Highlands and shoot a stag or two. Then put the head up on the walls. Or even better, go to Africa!

More people will be killed with knife's than gun in the UK this year but gun massacres life long in the memory. Hungerford massacre, Dunblane massacre and the recent Cumbria shootings. You can kill a lot of people with a gun, it's harder to kill a lot of people with a knife.

So guns have an image that the knife doesn't have here in the UK. Guns are weapons that are used to kill, where as a knife is used for cutting stuff up in the kitchen. People uses knife's every day, but will never see guns in their daily lifes.

I think guns in a way make it easier to kill so I believe that's one reason why countries that have high murder rates also have gun problems.

I agree, physically and emotionally. I would imagine shotting someone to be easier than stabbing someone. With a gun you just pull a trigger, then you can keep going until your out of bullets. You won't feel the person your shooting, unlike a knife. If you stab meat you can feel the knife go into the meat, which I guess is unpleasant if the meat your stabbing is still alive. You may also have to fight the person first, unlike a gun where you can stand back from your target.

Colombia, Jamaica and Mexico are all towards the bottom of the list and all have rampant gun issues. However I'm not sure if that is true for all nations at the bottom of the list.

http://www.photius.com/rankings/murder_rate_of_countries_2000-2004.html

The countries to the bottom of the list seem to be poor countries, which may explain it.

timbaly

22nd October 2010, 18:20

Switzerland has some of the highest rates of gun ownership in Europe and quite liberal gun ownership laws compared to other European nations yet the crime rates seem relatively low.

I suppose you can say it's relatively low but it is more twice as high as Denmark, Greece, Austria, Norway, Luxembourg, Ireland, Iceland, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and Italy. I'm not sure what the laws are like in those countries but I'm guessing they have lower gun ownership rates if what you say about Switzerland is true.

Havet

22nd October 2010, 18:40

My thoughts on the subject

http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/1752/libertyq.jpg

timbaly

22nd October 2010, 18:44

Well I don't really know. I'm sure the gun has never been the main weapon used in the UK. Normally it's been knife's or other house-hold objects.

'Gun sports' have historically been seen as something that the upper-classes do. What the rich do at the weekend, come up here to the Scottish Highlands and shoot a stag or two. Then put the head up on the walls. Or even better, go to Africa!

More people will be killed with knife's than gun in the UK this year but gun massacres life long in the memory. Hungerford massacre, Dunblane massacre and the recent Cumbria shootings. You can kill a lot of people with a gun, it's harder to kill a lot of people with a knife.

So guns have an image that the knife doesn't have here in the UK. Guns are weapons that are used to kill, where as a knife is used for cutting stuff up in the kitchen. People uses knife's every day, but will never see guns in their daily lifes.

I just did a little fact finding. I found that the murder rate was higher in the UK from 2000 -2004 than it was in ENGLAND and WALES in 1997. I couldn't find UK data on the murder rate, but I admit I did not try hard. The murder rate for England and Wales in 1997 was 14.1 per million and the rate in the UK was on average 21 per million from 2000-2004. It's hard to make conclusions here since we're dealing with two different data sets.

The countries to the bottom of the list seem to be poor countries, which may explain it.

I think that partially explains it. However Mexico is not a very poor country compared to most of the other nations at the bottom. I think the drug related violence in Colombia and Mexico is what is driving up the murder rates. There are also quite a few poor countries with very low rates like Botswana and Vanuatu.

ComradeMan

22nd October 2010, 19:52

I suppose you can say it's relatively low but it is more twice as high as Denmark, Greece, Austria, Norway, Luxembourg, Ireland, Iceland, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and Italy. I'm not sure what the laws are like in those countries but I'm guessing they have lower gun ownership rates if what you say about Switzerland is true.

I'm sorry- I dispute that Switzerland's violent crime is over twice as high as Italy to start with but I may be wrong. Secondly are you taking into account population sizes with these stats. The trouble with those stats is that don't say what was gun related. We need to find some sources perhaps that compare statistics.

From what information I see, a lot of Switzerland's gun deaths are suicides.

RGacky3

22nd October 2010, 20:33

In my experience, social democrats and liberals tend towards imposing legislation to protect people from themselves and each other even if that means restricting individual freedom (as well as gun control, consider e.g. the smoking ban in pubs in the UK and Europe, per-unit taxation of alcohol, trans-fat bans etc).

Liberals protect people from other people, thus the smoking bans (which I am against).

no, it isn't a strawman; I hear it all the time. Liberals/Democrats in the US want restrictions on guns.

Where?

That's pretty much the case. The same people that won't let you eat a Big Mac or smoke cigarettes in a restaurant. They feel that people just can't be trusted to take care of themselves so they need government to make rules and guidelines to follow.

The Nanny State Liberals.

I just don't see that argued by liberals in the states at all, wheres the argument.

I think mostly the argument is we need tax revenue, so we might as well take it from things that are harmfull rather than things that are not, which is like taking it from the rich rather than the poor, the argument is never protect peopel from themselves, or where is it?

ComradeMan

22nd October 2010, 20:43

The public smoking bans seemed to come in after the passive smoking lawsuits had started to be filed..... :rolleyes:

cb9's_unity

22nd October 2010, 21:03

That's pretty much the case. The same people that won't let you eat a Big Mac or smoke cigarettes in a restaurant. They feel that people just can't be trusted to take care of themselves so they need government to make rules and guidelines to follow.

The Nanny State Liberals.

Banning smoking in restaurants doesn't have much to do with 'taking care of yourself. It's about being able to eat in a place where you don't ever have to deal with disgusting cigarette smoke. If you want a cigarette either smoke before or after, its not that hard.

At least cigarette smokers can just go outside and smoke. They have no clue how much hassle I have to go through to smoke a joint because of The Nanny State Conservatives.

timbaly

22nd October 2010, 23:14

I'm sorry- I dispute that Switzerland's violent crime is over twice as high as Italy to start with but I may be wrong. Secondly are you taking into account population sizes with these stats. The trouble with those stats is that don't say what was gun related. We need to find some sources perhaps that compare statistics.

Based on the statistics from 2000-2004 Italy had a lower homicide rate than Switzerland. These figures do take population sizes into account because they are rate not absolute numbers. As you said before the stats do not tell you the toll used in the homicide.

From what information I see, a lot of Switzerland's gun deaths are suicides.

This might be true but it would not factor into the homicide rate. i believe guns are also the preferred method for suicide in the United States particularly for white males.

ComradeMan

23rd October 2010, 10:48

[QUOTE=timbaly;1903507]Based on the statistics from 2000-2004 Italy had a lower homicide rate than Switzerland. These figures do take population sizes into account because they are rate not absolute numbers. As you said before the stats do not tell you the toll used in the homicide.[QUOTE]

Fairplay to you then. You live and learn. 2000-2004 must have been a "quite period". But then a lot of this stuff can be based on perceptions.

I still maintain that having gun laws does not necessarily affect the crime-rate in that most criminals are not law-abiding gun license holders. Let's make it clear, I don't like guns, but I think the laws are misguided at times. What do those stats say about Belgium out of curiosity?

timbaly

23rd October 2010, 16:23

Fairplay to you then. You live and learn. 2000-2004 must have been a "quite period". But then a lot of this stuff can be based on perceptions.

What do you mean it can be "based on perceptions"? The numbers tell the murder rate, but not the murder rate by gun. Obviously correlation does not mean causation but it seems like there might be a link.

I still maintain that having gun laws does not necessarily affect the crime-rate in that most criminals are not law-abiding gun license holders. Let's make it clear, I don't like guns, but I think the laws are misguided at times. What do those stats say about Belgium out of curiosity?

I'm not sure that most criminals are law abiding gun holders either but I do think it's easier to get guns in country's that have lax laws around purchasing weapons. Even if the gun holder isn't legally licensed it's probably easier to get a gun in places where guns are legal. In Washington DC hand guns were banned for several years but people were able to get them across the river in Virginia fairly easily. They would then illegally bring them into DC and became non-licensed holders but it was still easy for the to get the guns.

The stats are here: http://www.photius.com/rankings/murder_rate_of_countries_2000-2004.html Belgium had a homicide rae of 1.5 pere 100,000 from 2000-2004

Noinu

24th October 2010, 00:02

Guns in general are bad in my opinion but I do think gun control hysteria is stupid as well. It's not like criminals have gun licenses is it?

Perhaps they are scared of an armed population more like? :scared:

There might be someone to have answered something like this already, but I'll still go:

Around here, there has been sort of a gun control hysteria for the last few years. After the first school shooting, the question about gun ownership rose. A year later another school shooting has now resulted in even more hysteria and it will probably only get worse if there's another one.
You might have even heard of the two guys, one in Jokela and one in Kauhajoki, who killed fellow pupils, teachers and headmaster.
Finland is rather liberal when it comes to gun ownership but now some people seem seriously paranoid and get crazy ideas to stop these things from happening.
Anyway my point was at least around here gun control isn't meant against criminals but against teenagers who should have gotten mental healthcare when it still mattered.

And I agree with you that guns in general aren't good but gun control hysteria can make things worse. Hysteria in any form usually makes things worse....

Budguy68

24th October 2010, 13:50

and beccause of thing, stupid right winger think that strict gun control is linked to leftism, and its making me so fucking mad.

Anti Gun Rights advocates usually do come from the left...

I've yet to met a rightwinger who is anti right to bear arms.

Plus Communist Leaders in the past like Stalin, Fidel, Mao were very anti right to bear arms... I am guessing yoru boy Chavez is the same way.

Anyways it seems that you commies want to have guns for your revolution but if you were to win it you would probably ban guns afterwards.

ComradeMan

24th October 2010, 14:05

It depends on the guns and what it's for- A farmer needs a rifle to protect his stock, that's fair enough- but handguns are for killing people, nothing else.

It's a complex issue.

PoliticalNightmare

24th October 2010, 15:11

While I am a social anarchist, I find (a lack of) gun laws a tough one to swallow.

Certainly in the UK where guns are, for the most part illegal (you have to be a licensed cop or a farmer of sorts) there seems to be far less gun crime than in the US where guns are available for most citizens. Perhaps though, in an anarchist society without government or capitalism there'd be less poverty, less causes of crimes and therefore less need to restrict guns.

I don't know.

#FF0000

24th October 2010, 17:16

Plus Communist Leaders in the past like Stalin, Fidel, Mao were very anti right to bear arms... I am guessing yoru boy Chavez is the same way.

Source for this? I wouldn't be all that surprised if it was true but just making sure.

Anyways it seems that you commies want to have guns for your revolution but if you were to win it you would probably ban guns afterwards.

No. I wouldn't support banning guns. I'd support letting local governments deal with it.

danyboy27

25th October 2010, 14:18

It depends on the guns and what it's for- A farmer needs a rifle to protect his stock, that's fair enough- but handguns are for killing people, nothing else.

It's a complex issue.

so fucking what? is there anything wrong with that? there is nothing wrong with owning a gun to protect itself or his family or his community. Of course it come with a big responsability, that why training is for.

ComradeMan

25th October 2010, 15:05

so fucking what? is there anything wrong with that? there is nothing wrong with owning a gun to protect itself or his family or his community. Of course it come with a big responsability, that why training is for.

Err.... killing people? :thumbup1:

danyboy27

25th October 2010, 17:17

Err.... killing people? :thumbup1:

in a situation where the other person is armed and have the intention to hurt you or kill you? absolutely.

killing should be avoided at all cost, but in certain situation its better than be killed or raped.

ComradeMan

25th October 2010, 19:49

in a situation where the other person is armed and have the intention to hurt you or kill you? absolutely.

killing should be avoided at all cost, but in certain situation its better than be killed or raped.

Well if it's self-defense I suppose you're right. But you could use a rifle for that. I think a rifle or shotgun at home is for defense is acceptable but the problem I have with handguns is people walk around with them, go into bars and get drunk with them in their pockets, get angry in the traffic "road rage" and pull out guns etc... if you see what I mean. Handguns are "concealed".

danyboy27

25th October 2010, 20:46

Well if it's self-defense I suppose you're right. But you could use a rifle for that. I think a rifle or shotgun at home is for defense is acceptable but the problem I have with handguns is people walk around with them, go into bars and get drunk with them in their pockets, get angry in the traffic "road rage" and pull out guns etc... if you see what I mean. Handguns are "concealed".

well, handgun are easier to grab in an emergency situation than a rifle, and are less complicated to maintain.

You can forbid people to wear weapon in certain places like Bar or public institution for security measures, but then again, cops go to work with pistol and i dont often hear about cop shooting each other at a police station over dispute.

Guns are not a problem in itself, Education is the problem.

PoliticalNightmare

25th October 2010, 21:00

Well if it's self-defense I suppose you're right. But you could use a rifle for that. I think a rifle or shotgun at home is for defense is acceptable but the problem I have with handguns is people walk around with them, go into bars and get drunk with them in their pockets, get angry in the traffic "road rage" and pull out guns etc... if you see what I mean. Handguns are "concealed".

That's true but its handy to have a hand gun (see what I did there?:D) when your walking around streets so you can protect yourself from violent gangs, etc. Obviously one wouldn't be walking around with a shot gun or anything. Maybe they ought to strip search for guns in bars? On second thoughts, maybe not... Out of interest, anyone know the statistics for the common causes/scenes for gun crime - do they tend to happen in pubs, traffic scenarios, etc.?

There just is no easy answer in terms of legalising guns, unfortunately. I personally would rather have a way of defending my own body and that of others though. I think training people to use guns properly would help a lot though.

Lt. Ferret

26th October 2010, 05:02

if you dont have a gun, and someone breaks into your house, how are you gonna shoot em?

Revolution starts with U

26th October 2010, 05:16

WeAreReborn

26th October 2010, 05:42

Budguy... Bud Struggle... hmmmm... :confused:
Whereas pre-gun, weapon banning lead to some pretty badass weapons (nunchucks, kama, etc), it has always been an anti-people measure. People need the ability to defend themselves, especially from the state.
But I second Best Mod's call for citations of Soviet gun laws.
Agreed, if the state can own tanks and missiles the least the people can have are guns, automatic or not. Plus who would rob someone knowing they had a M 16? I sure as hell wouldn't. Yet I am not pro-gun I think guns are horrible tools but in an unhealthy society such as America it is necessary for your security, sad but true.

MellowViper

29th October 2010, 11:09

Instead of doing something to end conditions of poverty that act as a hotbed for higher murder rates, they focus on the instruments used for murder, as if that's the actual cause. Its really ass backwards. Speaking of guns, I plan on getting an AK or Mosin-Nagant. I really would like a politician that would support, both, stem cell research and gun rights. That's hard to come by. I'm not a violent person, but I think they're necessary for self defense. Once there's no more state, no war, and equality among all people, we won't have any further use for guns, but, until then, I'm going to keep one.

http://poorrighteousparty.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/zzzzzzzzzxxxxxxxxzzzzzz.jpg

Camlon

31st October 2010, 04:14

I suppose you can say it's relatively low but it is more twice as high as Denmark, Greece, Austria, Norway, Luxembourg, Ireland, Iceland, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and Italy. I'm not sure what the laws are like in those countries but I'm guessing they have lower gun ownership rates if what you say about Switzerland is true.
Actually. it's not. Switzerland has 7.3 million people and 334K criminal offenses in 2003. Last data I found. That's a crime rate of 4575 per 100K. Norway got around 8000 per 100K. Same with UK and Denmark and Sweden got 14000.

Also, if you compare rape, then Switzerland had 7.5 rapes per 100K. Norway got around 25 per 100K and Sweden got 68 per 100K.

Even if you take murder rate, then Switzerland got an average about 1.0, which is the same as Sweden and Denmark and a little bit higher than Norway. So please don't spread lies.