So how about banning all semi-automatic weapons?

FootballFirst

FootballFirst

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Not even a little. We manage to defend our 2nd all the time, in fact it will be defended right soon yet again. Kindly explain how you would defend your 1st with your firearms.
Click to expand...
It's absolutely arbitrary. You did fine. Thanks for proving my point.
 
Saltrock

Saltrock

Active Member
Dr Kynes said:
because there were very few automatic weapons sold before the sale of machine guns was restricted in 1934, and made practically illegal in 1968.

there are remarkably few grenade crimes in america too, since grenades were put on the nono list in 1934 as well. at the time, restriction of machineguns (expensive and rarely used weapons) and grenades (almost unheardof outside the military) was considered reasonable and proper for a civilized society, particularly in the heyday of the motorized bandit gangs like the dillinger gang and bonnie and clyde, but if you tried to pass that same law today you would fail. too many poeople have seen that reasonable measures are just the first move, and the goalposts shift with alarming regularity. the old playbook of "Think Of The Children!" and "only wingnuts and birchers would want those kinds of MURDERGUNS!" will fall flat. even with the Brahmin in Chief's personal auctoritas pushing the bill forward.

his gravitas doesnt move the people like it used to, since he has revealed himself to be a stuffed shirt.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight. Their are fewer machine guns and grenade incidences due to regulation set back a long time ago, and how would more guns= less violence? Oh right criminals only target gun free zones. I have to go to work ladies , love you guys, don't beat each other up all day.

Peace
Salt
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
NoDrama,
I tried explaining that to his thick skull. So I'll say it again. NYC heavily controls guns. The crime rate is nearly the same. The only difference now, crimes with knives went up 50%. Guns and knives have their pros and cons in the criminal's perspective. Law enforcement claims long distance and high body count as gun dangers. Reality shows, the fact a knife makes no sound during use, unlike a loud gun. With a dense population, like in NYC, you can knife someone and since no one hears it, can get to a further distance away before others complain. You get the fuck out of there once you hear a gun.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
I tried explaining that to his thick skull. So I'll say it again. NYC heavily controls guns. The crime rate is nearly the same. The only difference now, crimes with knives went up 50%. Guns and knives have their pros and cons in the criminal's perspective. Law enforcement claims long distance and high body count as gun dangers. Reality shows, the fact a knife makes no sound during use, unlike a loud gun. With a dense population, like in NYC, you can knife someone and since no one hears it, can get to a further distance away before others complain. You get the fuck out of there once you hear a gun.
Click to expand...
I don't know if you have been following the news but these conversations are prompted not by conventional, ordinary New York City murders but by deranged folks killing innocents in malls and churches and movie theaters and kindergardens. That kinda puts a different spin and a different sort of slant on the old question "kives vs guns".

And NYC is a really bad place to test gun laws don'tchathink?
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Those 20 kindergardeners should have been armed? All I am saying is that the banning of fully automatic weapons has managed to keep most automatic weapons out of most civilian hands and few mass shootings are committed with fully automatic weapons. Now it is possible that all of the last few mass killings could have been committed with knives, but it would be very unlikely. Now I see that you are reverting to the relative mereits of death by gunshot to death by knife wound. THAT is a reasonable argument for the widespread use of guns if ever I have seen one.
Click to expand...
Goddamned you are dense. If there are 4 million knives and 1 gun, which are you most likely to get hurt by? Guns or knives?
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
I don't know if you have been following the news but these conversations are prompted not by conventional, ordinary New York City murders but by deranged folks killing innocents in malls and churches and movie theaters and kindergardens. That kinda puts a different spin and a different sort of slant on the old question "kives vs guns".

And NYC is a really bad place to test gun laws don'tchathink?
Click to expand...
You're thicker than I thought. We are currently in test mode. AFTER the gun restrictions in NYC, crime didn't change, only the method, more knives.

Gun laws should be bases on regular occurrence murders, not ones which happen rarely compared to those.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
You're thicker than I thought. We are currently in test mode. AFTER the gun restrictions in NYC, crime didn't change, only the method, more knives.

Gun laws should be bases on regular occurrence murders, not ones which happen rarely compared to those.
Click to expand...

Dense? No, I am talking about the exact same topic that most aware americans are presently talking about and it is not knife violence in New York.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
Go back to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
and tell me how many countries have a worse homicide rate than the USA. If any of those countries has even an ounce of gun control it will invalidate your entire argument.
Click to expand...


That isn't what he said, he said I sould compare the U.S. with Australia and the U.K. Australia and the UK have fewer per 100,000 purposeful homicides than the U.S. does by a significant margin. If you want to keep hunting for examples that prove whatever case you are trying to make, go right ahead.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
That isn't what he said, he said I sould compare the U.S. with Australia and the U.K. Australia and the UK have fewer per 100,000 purposeful homicides than the U.S. does by a significant margin. If you want to keep hunting for examples that prove whatever case you are trying to make, go right ahead.
Click to expand...
And the UK has a violent crime rate four times higher than the US.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
And the UK has a violent crime rate four times higher than the US.
Click to expand...

Shall we conclude then that their medical care is so superior to ours that those who are knifed are more often kept alive then? The figures I posted show that intentional murder rate is four times higher in this country than in Austraila or the UK.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
That isn't what he said, he said I sould compare the U.S. with Australia and the U.K. Australia and the UK have fewer per 100,000 purposeful homicides than the U.S. does by a significant margin. If you want to keep hunting for examples that prove whatever case you are trying to make, go right ahead.
Click to expand...
Purposeful homicides? Why do you only compare it to one specific metric? How about just general violence, I know I would hate to get shot, but being knifed kinda sucks too. As far as violent crime per capita, the UK and Aus are both higher than the USA. which has a rate of 466 per 100,000. Looks like Aus and the UK both have over 5 times the rate of crime as the USA does. hmmmmmmmm???

Shame.jpg
 
Canna Sylvan

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
Homicide rate is a great indicator of how nice a place is to live. Somalia and China have a comparable rate to the UK and Australia. I'd love to move to either Somalia or China.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, Somalia is Utopia, Warlords and all. All automatic weapons are illegal and all handguns must be registered. http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/somalia

If there ever was proof that gun control is working it MUST be Somalia.somalia_technicals.jpg
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
Purposeful homicides? Why do you only compare it to one specific metric? How about just general violence, I know I would hate to get shot, but being knifed kinda sucks too. As far as violent crime per capita, the UK and Aus are both higher than the USA. which has a rate of 466 per 100,000. Looks like Aus and the UK both have over 5 times the rate of crime as the USA does. hmmmmmmmm???

View attachment 2450160
Click to expand...


I am using purpseful murder because I am talking about purpseful murder, not something as amorphous as "violent crime". purposeful murder precludes accidental death and suicide.

The fact is that you seem to be cherry picking your data to attempt to dispute data that was specificly asked of me. Deaths are the most concrete and indisputable measure that I can think of that - again, excludes the ability of a particular medical system to correct.

What you seem to be implying is either the U.K. is more violent than the U.S. but not so violent as to actually take lives, or that their medical system is better. Simple thing actuallyl, in the two countries that have strict gun laws, there are fewer murders than in this one. That actually proves nothing about gun law.gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg



But you seem to think there is a direct correlation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top