OT: More GUNS

[TerpEagle]

Lust brings increased availability
Anger brings regrettable action

Take away the lust, limit the availability
People still get pissed, but throw popcorn instead.

Exactly. Availability and the presence of guns means that there are more incidents.

Guns are so readily available for purposeful and accidental acts of violence because there are so many guns period. And there are so many guns period because there is so much demand for guns i.e. gun lust.

[Chupacabra]

Don't you people ever get tired of going around and around on this issue?

[TerpEagle]

Terp, although I understand what you are saying, in all honesty do you think that these cases with young kids shooting other people is attributed to "lust" I see it as more of an outcry, or anger triggered response?

Lots of people get angry. Some of them are able to find help before they response violently. Other are not.

Readily available guns, which exponentially make violence easier, increase the chance that people who are apt to respond angrily have the means to do so before receiving help and/or a more efficiently deadly way to express that anger.

It's about opportunity - and more guns increase the opportunity for violence and deadly ends.

[The Ref]

violence in general. Maybe because our country was born out of violence, split in half and came back through violence, expanded through violence. Our TV shows, movies and games are filled with violence.

Europe has a violent history. So does each Asian country. Both older than us.

The closest analog to the US is Australia regarding gun culture. They had (have) one too. One could argue that as originally a penal colony, they were even more prone to violence.

After also experiencing a number of gun tragedies, they passed regulations that have proven to save lives. The notion that people have basic human right to possess firearms is ridiculous.

Guns are designed for one purpose only -- to kill! All of those comparisons to other things that harm people, like cars, booze, etc, are silly stupid. Guns have only one purpose -- to KILL! (it bears repeating ad infinitum)

Owning an instrument that is only designed to kill is a sobering concept. It's insane to consider that ownership a right for every citizen.

Read it if you're interested. Just one woman's take. Australia didn't ban guns, but they now have a saner approach to allowing ownership. And one I believe we should model our laws after.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ol-saves-lives

[Eagle Road]

Europe has a violent history. So does each Asian country. Both older than us.

The closest analog to the US is Australia regarding gun culture. They had (have) one too. One could argue that as originally a penal colony, they were even more prone to violence.

After also experiencing a number of gun tragedies, they passed regulations that have proven to save lives. The notion that people have basic human right to possess firearms is ridiculous.

Guns are designed for one purpose only -- to kill! All of those comparisons to other things that harm people, like cars, booze, etc, are silly stupid. Guns have only one purpose -- to KILL! (it bears repeating ad infinitum)

Owning an instrument that is only designed to kill is a sobering concept. It's insane to consider that ownership a right for every citizen.

Read it if you're interested. Just one woman's take. Australia didn't ban guns, but they now have a saner approach to allowing ownership. And one I believe we should model our laws after.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ol-saves-lives

This article is in direct opposition of what you posted, so which one is the truth?


Australian Gun Ban Facts & Statistics
Reasonforforce ^
Posted on 1/3/2013 6:48:26 AM by RC one

It has now been over 10 years since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The statistics for the years following the ban are now in:

Accidental gun deaths are 300% higher than the pre-1997 ban rate

The assault rate has increased 800% since 1991, and increased 200% since the 1997 gun ban.

Robbery and armed robbery have increase 20% from the pre-97 ban rate.

From immediately after the ban was instituted in 1997 through 2002, the robbery and armed robbery rate was up 200% over the pre-ban rates.

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 171 percent

TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol; secondamendment

Let's examine the overall murder rate and the gun murder rate in Australia. Take note both are virtually unchanged and unaffected by the gun ban. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. While the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns

Some more fun tables to shut liberals up:

ASSAULT



The trend in assaults shows an average growth of five percent each year from 1995 to 2007. The Australians "banned" guns in 1997 as you will recall.

ROBBERY



Oh look how armed robbery increased after the gun ban. Look how robbery increased too. Note that incidence of armed robbery as compared to unarmed robbery never changed after the gun ban. It's almost as if the only affect the gun ban had was to increase the number of people that were robbed (or assaulted).

MURDER



Oh look. after we banned guns in 1997, people murdered by guns decreased by 10%. On the other hand, people murdered by knives increased by 10%. Well, at least you weren't shot to death and thank goodness no criminals were hurt in the commission of their murders. Awesome!

RAPE



Reported sexual assaults have increased by 51 percent since 1995, at an average of four percent each year. Let's not forget about those little Sheilas now. look at that. They're getting raped more often than ever now that the rapists know they're unarmed. How about that.



http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2974487/posts




If you scroll through this Gov. website, ALL of these numbers and graphs are listed.

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics.html

[Greenstealth]

You have to forgive ref, he's a little dumb. As far as drunk driving goes, the easiest solution is to get rid of cars errr alcohol, wait what?

[IronEagle]

US vs. Spain

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/spain.php

[Eagle Road]

You have to forgive ref, he's a little dumb. As far as drunk driving goes, the easiest solution is to get rid of cars errr alcohol, wait what?

I just try and circumvent posted articles as much as I can, because unless you are backing it up with REAL statistics, not someone's viewpoint, you are at the mercy of said viewpoint.

The Guardian is well know as a very liberal British newspaper, what I posted was from the Free Republic, which is know as a Conservative news source.

However, the article from the FR did list the Aussie's Gov. website as their point of reference, meaning that instead of just spouting off an opinion, (and a wrong one at that, as the numbers indicate) someone did their homework.

It just always amazes me that some people will so willing put something out there without first checking it out.

[IronEagle]

Lots of people get angry. Some of them are able to find help before they response violently. Other are not.

Readily available guns, which exponentially make violence easier, increase the chance that people who are apt to respond angrily have the means to do so before receiving help and/or a more efficiently deadly way to express that anger.

It's about opportunity - and more guns increase the opportunity for violence and deadly ends.

I'm not sure why people don't realize regulation does not equal prohibition.

For an example, the US once PROHIBITED alcoholic beverages. Now they are regulated. I believe the word regulated is in the second amendment.

[Melchior]

That reads like an objective and well-reasoned article.

[Eagle Road]

I'm not sure why people don't realize regulation does not equal prohibition.

For an example, the US once PROHIBITED alcoholic beverages. Now they are regulated. I believe the word regulated is in the second amendment.

I will see your Spain, and raise you a Switzerland,

switzerland

The Swiss Difference: A Gun Culture That Works

The country had one mass shooting in 2001, but a resulting anti-gun referendum failed to pass. The Swiss will not give up the gun. Can their system work in the U.S.?

By Helena Bachmann / Geneva Dec. 20, 2012358 Comments

inShare
7
Read Later
image: Swiss marksmen shoot with their rifles at targets over 300 metres away in a field during the 'Eidgenoessisches Feldschiessen' (annual shooting skills exercise) on the Aeschlenalp near Bern, June 6, 2009.
Michael Buholzer / Reuters
Swiss marksmen shoot at targets over 300 m away during an annual shooting-skills exercise near Bern

Email Print Share Comment
Follow @TIMEWorld
Even as the gun-control debate rises again in the U.S. in the aftermath of the horrific school shooting in Newtown, Conn., the gun-loving Swiss are not about to lay down their arms. Guns are ubiquitous in this neutral nation, with sharpshooting considered a fun and wholesome recreational activity for people of all ages.

Even though Switzerland has not been involved in an armed conflict since a standoff between Catholics and Protestants in 1847, the Swiss are very serious not only about their right to own weapons but also to carry them around in public. Because of this general acceptance and even pride in gun ownership, nobody bats an eye at the sight of a civilian riding a bus, bike or motorcycle to the shooting range, with a rifle slung across the shoulder.

(MORE: The World’s Best — and Worst — Places to Live)

“We will never change our attitude about the responsible use of weapons by law-abiding citizens,” says Hermann Suter, vice president of Pro-Tell, the country’s gun lobby, named after legendary apple shooter William Tell, who used a crossbow to target enemies long before firearms were invented.

Switzerland trails behind only the U.S, Yemen and Serbia in the number of guns per capita; between 2.3 million and 4.5 million military and private firearms are estimated to be in circulation in a country of only 8 million people. Yet, despite the prevalence of guns, the violent-crime rate is low: government figures show about 0.5 gun homicides per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. By comparison, the U.S rate in the same year was about 5 firearm killings per 100,000 people, according to a 2011 U.N. report.

Unlike some other heavily armed nations, Switzerland’s gun ownership is deeply rooted in a sense of patriotic duty and national identity. Weapons are kept at home because of the long-held belief that enemies could invade tiny Switzerland quickly, so every soldier had to be able to fight his way to his regiment’s assembly point. (Switzerland was at risk of being invaded by Germany during World War II but was spared, historians say, because every Swiss man was armed and trained to shoot.)

(MORE: Switzerland: Are Its Days as a Tax Haven for Foreigners Numbered?)

But the “gun in every closet” tradition was challenged in 2001, after a disgruntled citizen opened fire with his army rifle inside a regional parliament, killing 14 and injuring 14 others — the only mass shooting in Switzerland’s recent history. The subsequent opposition to widespread gun ownership spearheaded a push for stricter arms legislation. The government and pro-gun groups argued, however, that the country’s existing laws regulating the sale, ownership and licensing of private guns, which includes a ban on carrying concealed weapons, are stringent enough. The law allows citizens or legal residents over the age of 18, who have obtained a permit from the government and who have no criminal record or history of mental illness, to buy up to three weapons from an authorized dealer, with the exception of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons, which are banned. Semiautomatics, which have caused havoc in the U.S., can be legally purchased.

The authorities made one concession, though: since 2008, all military — but not private — ammunition must be stored in central arsenals rather than in soldiers’ homes. The debate culminated in a nationwide referendum last year, when 56% of voters rejected the proposal initiated by anti-gun organizations to ban army rifles from homes altogether.

Although guns are responsible for between 200 and 300 suicides each year in Switzerland, Pro-Tell’s Suter says these statistics have to be put in a wider perspective. He points out that the bullets used in suicides are only a tiny fraction of the 75 million rounds of ammunition that are fired each year in Switzerland during military and civilian target practice.

(MORE: When the Swiss Aren’t Neutral: Chocolates and the CIA)

One of the reasons the crime rate in Switzerland is low despite the prevalence of weapons — and also why the Swiss mentality can’t be transposed to the current American reality — is the culture of responsibility and safety that is anchored in society and passed from generation to generation. Kids as young as 12 belong to gun groups in their local communities, where they learn sharpshooting. The Swiss Shooting Sports Association runs about 3,000 clubs and has 150,000 members, including a youth section. Many members keep their guns and ammunition at home, while others choose to leave them at the club. And yet, despite such easy access to pistols and rifles, “no members have ever used their guns for criminal purposes,” says Max Flueckiger, the association’s spokesperson.

“Social conditions are fundamental in deterring crime,” says Peter Squires, professor of criminology and public policy at the University of Brighton in Great Britain, who has studied gun violence in different countries and concluded that a “culture of support” rather than focus on individualism, can deter mass killings.

“If people have a responsible, disciplined and organized introduction into an activity like shooting, there will be less risk of gun violence,” he tells TIME.

That sense of social and civic responsibility is one of the reasons the Swiss have never allowed their guns to come under fire.



Read more: How Switzerland Developed a Gun Culture That Works | TIME.com http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the...#ixzz2qhcjdtOS

[IronEagle]

what I posted was from the Free Republic, which is know as a Conservative news source.
.

Ok now we know who you are. You are a follower of the "Free Republic" web site.

Thanks for outing yourself!

[Eagle Road]

Ok now we know who you are. You are a follower of the "Free Republic" web site.

Thanks for outing yourself!

I read a lot, from a lot of different sources, if I only read from one it would mean that my opinions could never evolve, right? :D

[IronEagle]

I will see your Spain, and raise you a Switzerland,

You fail to understand the point. In both Spain and in Switzerland there are plenty of firearms. The difference as opposed to the US is that in those countries they are regulated. They are not prohibited in any of Spain, Switzerland, or the US. In the US the regulations are minimal.

Go back to reading the "Free Republic" website.

[IronEagle]

I read a lot, from a lot of different sources, if I only read from one it would mean that my opinions could never evolve, right? :D

Of course you are posting from one "Free Republic" here as if it is absolute truth. Basically you've outed yourself as if it wasn't apparent from your earlier posts.