|
Civilised?
Well Done Illinois.
|
|
|
|
|
You beat me to the punch there!
|
|
|
|
|
Can't keep using that word. We've seen the NYE photo galleries.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you seen that Gun in the Photo of the article you linked too. Are you seriously bemoaning the fact that a State want's to outlaw it?
I will sleep better in my Bed tonight knowing that if a Burglar crept into my house he wouldn't be armed with that, as he won't have access to it. My Missus will sleep easier in my Bed knowing that I can get up and Beat the Sh*t out of any Intruders, without having to rely on trying to get access to a Gun Cabinet in the middle of the night.
At the end of the day I guarantee you my Missus feels more safer with me to protect her in a gun-free society than yours does in a gun-prevalent society, no matter how many guns of varying type you own.
(Good Point on the NYE photos though, although I haven't seen them this Year I can imagine. Link will be appreciated.)
|
|
|
|
|
What part of banning a gun, will stop a criminal from possessing or using one?
In a county where these guns are already illegal, a criminal was caught with a fully auto high capacity accepting gun (by my future sister in law). I'll point out a fully auto tec9 has been illegal on the federal level since the 80's.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I understand that in a Country that has an abundance of Guns, banning them now would be a bit like 'Bolting the Stable Door'. But over here Guns are extremely rare, (in fact I have only ever known one person to have a gun and he didn't have any bullets for it).
Anyway where's my NYE links?
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder what the shooting crime is like in Italy, where AR15's aren't that restricted.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not so much the legality that is the problem it's the willingness to have them. I am sure that the average American is more eager to own, and believe he has a right to own, an AR15 than your typical Italian.
|
|
|
|
|
From my experience, Italian Americans are the most eager.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it was a mafie joke, but in some seriousness. I know many people of Jewish and Italian dissent that have been raised with a distrust of governments, especially gungrabbers. I'm not playing Godwin's Law, just saying that people of this cultural background have been raised with certain values.
|
|
|
|
|
The Reincarnation wrote:
It's not so much the legality that is the problem
it's the willingness to have them. I am sure that the average American is more
eager to own, and believe he has a right to own, an AR15 than your typical
Italian.
And perhaps more willing to use them and use them to 'solve' a greater variety of problems as well.
|
|
|
|
|
My brother in law used to own several licenced handguns - a 9mm semi-automatic pistol and a .44 Magnum revolver (Dirty Harry type), but had to turn them in after the Dunblane massacre[^]
I felt much safer afterwards, as he was an alcoholic and I wouldn't trust him with a pea-shooter after he had hit the sauce, never mind a lethal weapon.
====================================
Transvestites - Roberts in Disguise!
====================================
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Quinn wrote: I felt much safer afterwards, as he was an alcoholic and I wouldn't trust him
with a pea-shooter after he had hit the sauce, never mind a lethal weapon.
And did he own a car?
|
|
|
|
|
No
====================================
Transvestites - Roberts in Disguise!
====================================
|
|
|
|
|
Who said it stops them?
It's a question of statistics isn't it? First gun culture isn't the norm here, so few people would be thinking of carrying a gun in the first place. Most burglaries, for example, in the UK are opportunistic, so the burglar doesn't feel the need to arm themselves against the householder they are burgling and so don't need to carry guns. Similar logic applies to most other crimes, and probably prevents a lot of heat-of-the-moment shootings too.
Additionally, as we have a gun ban, anyone carrying a firearm is [almost] automatically doing something illegal, often the penalty for carrying the gun is worse than the crime the criminal is likely to carry out. This logic follows sane pattern as the above, if you are carrying a gun, your intention is that you are prepared to kill or seriously injure someone who is likely to be unarmed in the progress of your criminal activity.
The really heavy criminals are always going to have access to guns, but then there probably less likely to actually shoot someone with them compared to a similarly armed petty criminal.
I normally keep out of gun control debates: it's a bit like religion. Both sides think that whoever disagree with them is nuts (as I do, I really can't understand the gun culture in the US) and I've never seen anyone say "You know what- you are right" to someone who opposes them (again I've never heard one pro-gun argument that I've found at all convincing). When topics like this are discussed, it becomes pointless, the same debating positions are raised (endlessly) and people sit in their own positions without really listening (again, I'm guilty of this, and that's why I normally keep out of it).
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: Additionally, as we have a gun ban, anyone carrying a firearm is [almost] automatically doing something illegal, often the penalty for carrying the gun is worse than the crime the criminal is likely to carry out. This logic follows sane pattern as the above, if you are carrying a gun, your intention is that you are prepared to kill or seriously injure someone who is likely to be unarmed in the progress of your criminal activity.
The sad thing is, in this state, this is already the case. Unfortunately most of these criminals will serve no time for it though. And that to me is the problem. 500+ murders in a city where guns are basically illegal, assault weapons are banned, and carrying a weapon is a felony. The Governor in the meantime, has fought to close prisons, as there allegedly, aren't enough prisoners for them to stay open.
|
|
|
|
|
wizardzz wrote: The Governor in the meantime, has fought to close prisons, as there allegedly,
aren't enough prisoners for them to stay open.
I haven't seen any convincing evidence that more people in prisons solves anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Would you like a list of crimes committed by people let out early because the Governor wanted to close prisons?
This piece of sh*t has gone on to commit further crimes, too. His partner was even found dead, but since the murder rate is so high, it got classified as a "death" investigation.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-12-31/news/0912310242_1_attack-shattered-hall-and-hoffman[^]
Also, since this debate is now all a result of grown men killing children. How exactly do grown men kill children from within jail?
|
|
|
|
|
wizardzz wrote: Would you like a list of crimes committed by people let out early because the Governor wanted to close prisons?
That obviously has nothing to do with anything.
The point of prisons is not to stop specific individuals but rather to decrease crime in general - thus my point.
So unless you have some credible evidence that increasing prison population significantly decreases crime my point stands (ignoring specious arguments about no prisons at all.)
wizardzz wrote: This piece of sh*t has gone on to commit further crimes, too
And I could cite individual cases where innocent individuals were convicted and other individuals received absolutely ridiculous sentences for trivial offenses. But since I live in a human society not an space alien one then exceptions will always exist in imperfect systems. So best we can do is strive for the best solution that we can find.
And there is no evidence that increasing prison populations is helping the crime rate. And there is evidence that it has negative impacts as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: When topics like this are discussed, it becomes pointless, the same debating
positions are raised (endlessly)
How is that different versus any other topic which is not technical?
|
|
|
|
|
The Reincarnation wrote: I will sleep better in my Bed tonight knowing that if a Burglar crept into my
house he wouldn't be armed with that, as he won't have access to it. My Missus
will sleep easier in my Bed knowing that I can get up and Beat the sh*t out of
any Intruders, without having to rely on trying to get access to a Gun Cabinet
in the middle of the night.
Specious given that a burglar was creeping into your house they wouldn't have that in the first place for many reasons such as cost and even ease of use.
The Reincarnation wrote: At the end of the day I guarantee you my Missus feels more safer with me to
protect her in a gun-free society
Quite possible but specious as well in the context of this discussion because any such discussion relevant to this will NOT create a gun-free society.
Would your wife feel safer knowing for a fact that the burglar WOULD have a gun and you would NOT?
|
|
|
|
|
With the OP now removed... I can only guess the food in Illinois just got worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When I did the research the AR style rifles are really kind of cool from an enthusiast perspective. You can keep all of the same hardware and swap out receivers/barrels, depending on what type of shooting you want to do. Want to plink or target shoot in they yard, swap in a .22 receiver, want to hunt, swap in the .223, want to do anything in between swap a few parts. Really, a very cool piece of machinery when you think about it. Of course, considering an 8 round .22 revolver is just as capable of killing kids as an assault rifle, we will all be safer with out the rifles, Not like a revolver fits concealed in your pocket while the rifle has to be visibly carried. But I digress.
Ban all guns, all income should go to the government and then be redistributed based on need, cars that go over 60mph are to fast, and trucks are a waste, what we need is global public transit. Every one deserves free health care too; waiting 4 months to see a doctor so you can be denied surgery because you don't fit the right "category" is perfectly acceptable.
Oh, and, ban, soccer, that game sucks. (This line is likely the most offensive line in my post)
|
|
|
|
|