Guns make you safer.
having a gun saved my life.
*Australians Without Guns*
Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts...
From: Ed Chenel, a police officer in Australia:
Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from
Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia
were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to
be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia
taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up
300 percent.
(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not and criminals STILL possess THEIR guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms this has changed drastically upward in
the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that
their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in
break-ins and assaults of the elderly.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety
has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended
in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns." You won't see
this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members
of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest
citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect
only the law-abiding citizens.
_Take note Americans, before it's too late!_
DON'T BE A MEMBER OF THE SILENT MAJORITY.
BE OF THE VOCAL MINORITY WHO WON'T LET THIS HAPPEN IN THE U.S.A
*Australians Without Guns*
Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts...
From: Ed Chenel, a police officer in Australia:
Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from
Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia
were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to
be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia
taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up
300 percent.
(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not and criminals STILL possess THEIR guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms this has changed drastically upward in
the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that
their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in
break-ins and assaults of the elderly.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety
has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended
in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns." You won't see
this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members
of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest
citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect
only the law-abiding citizens.
_Take note Americans, before it's too late!_
DON'T BE A MEMBER OF THE SILENT MAJORITY.
BE OF THE VOCAL MINORITY WHO WON'T LET THIS HAPPEN IN THE U.S.A
All of you that are for gun control just haven't look at the facts. I myself was at one time for some sort of control. After I did research for a college paper and honestly looked at the facts, I changed my mind.
Every scholar who has "switched" has moved away from the anti-gun position. Dave Kopel, an expert in constitutional issues and firearms research, categorically states that, "Every scholar who has 'switched' has 'switched' to the side that is skeptical of controls. Indeed, most of the prominent academic voices who are gun control skeptics -- including law professor Sanford Levinson and criminologists Gary Kleck and James Wright -- are people who, when they began studying guns, were supporters of the gun control agenda."41
Every scholar who has "switched" has moved away from the anti-gun position. Dave Kopel, an expert in constitutional issues and firearms research, categorically states that, "Every scholar who has 'switched' has 'switched' to the side that is skeptical of controls. Indeed, most of the prominent academic voices who are gun control skeptics -- including law professor Sanford Levinson and criminologists Gary Kleck and James Wright -- are people who, when they began studying guns, were supporters of the gun control agenda."41
* Concealed carry laws are dropping crime rates across the country. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:
* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;16 and
* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.17
* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;16 and
* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.17
Nope, I just figure than when people started talking that shrub nonsense it was over. Apparently not.
In case after case where liberalization of gun laws occurs the gun haters shit themselves about the coming wave of murder and mayhem. It never happens. A good example was the passage of Florida's concealed carry law. Everybody went nuts about how awful the results would be. The murder rate went down.
The problem with the anti self defense movement is that nothing can convince the true believers, ever. They know that guns can be used to kill people, and that's all they need to know. They don't care to know that you can never keep guns out of the hands of the lawless. They don't think you and I have any right to defend ourselves. They believe this is the job of the police. The police can't defend people, they just try to deal with the aftermath of violence. Investigations, arrests, prosecutions.
If guns are outlawed they'll be shipped into the country inside bales of marijuana. Criminals will always have guns. The only question is will the law abiding?
In England, once the home of a proud and thriving gun culture, the police went unarmed. Today guns are all but illegal for citizens, the police are armed to the teeth, and criminals brazenly kick down the front door and invade occupied homes. They can be certain that their intended victims will offer no meaningful resistence.
In Montana criminals almost never do violent home invasions because they know they are more likely than not to get their asses shot. It simply ain't worth it for the bad guys. No complicated cost/benefit analysis required. That's the economic theory I'm talking about.
I hope you never have the power to create the laws for the world you want to live in. If you do you'll be shocked at what you wrought. No, on second thought you wouldn't be. Because you don't really care.
In case after case where liberalization of gun laws occurs the gun haters shit themselves about the coming wave of murder and mayhem. It never happens. A good example was the passage of Florida's concealed carry law. Everybody went nuts about how awful the results would be. The murder rate went down.
The problem with the anti self defense movement is that nothing can convince the true believers, ever. They know that guns can be used to kill people, and that's all they need to know. They don't care to know that you can never keep guns out of the hands of the lawless. They don't think you and I have any right to defend ourselves. They believe this is the job of the police. The police can't defend people, they just try to deal with the aftermath of violence. Investigations, arrests, prosecutions.
If guns are outlawed they'll be shipped into the country inside bales of marijuana. Criminals will always have guns. The only question is will the law abiding?
In England, once the home of a proud and thriving gun culture, the police went unarmed. Today guns are all but illegal for citizens, the police are armed to the teeth, and criminals brazenly kick down the front door and invade occupied homes. They can be certain that their intended victims will offer no meaningful resistence.
In Montana criminals almost never do violent home invasions because they know they are more likely than not to get their asses shot. It simply ain't worth it for the bad guys. No complicated cost/benefit analysis required. That's the economic theory I'm talking about.
I hope you never have the power to create the laws for the world you want to live in. If you do you'll be shocked at what you wrought. No, on second thought you wouldn't be. Because you don't really care.
Tom, that thing that happened in the 80's can be traced to Don Johnson(Miami Vice) and the cocaine cowboys. HA. HA, Dam that Rico and Tubbs!!!
I believe Day was referring to the Bush bashing that was starting a few post's ago, he may well deserve it, but save it for the usual politic.al threads....unless we want to hijack this one too....
I believe Day was referring to the Bush bashing that was starting a few post's ago, he may well deserve it, but save it for the usual politic.al threads....unless we want to hijack this one too....
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.....
The shrub stuff wasn't nonsense, but it now has its very own thread, so this one can concentrate on gun control.
TradMike: I think just about everybody still believes in gun control, its just a question of where they draw the line. No guns? No handguns? What about teflon rounds? Explosive rounds? Rifles that can kill from a mile away? Rocket Propelled grenades? Anti-aircraft guns? I think it's obvious that total prohibition could not work in the United States, but I also think it's obvious that my neighbor shouldn't be able to get his hands on a M134 minigun, which can fire upwards of 4,000 rounds per minute.
Day: When I was last in England (2001) the police were still unarmed. Can anybody here say wether his assertion is accurate? I'm looking at you, Pigsteak.
TradMike: I think just about everybody still believes in gun control, its just a question of where they draw the line. No guns? No handguns? What about teflon rounds? Explosive rounds? Rifles that can kill from a mile away? Rocket Propelled grenades? Anti-aircraft guns? I think it's obvious that total prohibition could not work in the United States, but I also think it's obvious that my neighbor shouldn't be able to get his hands on a M134 minigun, which can fire upwards of 4,000 rounds per minute.
Day: When I was last in England (2001) the police were still unarmed. Can anybody here say wether his assertion is accurate? I'm looking at you, Pigsteak.
http://contributor.yahoo.com/user/496691/daniel_beck.html
A lot of the statistics cited here are questionable. Crime is fairly complicated, statistics wise, and much of what's been cited here implies a causal relationship where none may exist. Baghdad has a lot of guns, and a lot of crime. Swizterland has a lot of guns, and virtually no crime. The book Freakonomics had a chapter on the decline of crime in the 90's. There were a couple of interesting conclusions relative to our discussion here. First, that "while a strong 1990's economy might have seemed, on the surface, a likely explanation for the drop in crime, it almost certainly didn't affect criminal behavior in any significant way."(122) The book also stated that several reliable studies had found almost no link between economy and violent crime. Second, that neither gun control laws nor right-to-carry laws brought down crime. Discussing an economist who wrote the book More Guns, Less Crime, the authors said "When other scholars have tried to replicate his results, they found that right-to-carry laws simply don't bring down crime."(134)
http://contributor.yahoo.com/user/496691/daniel_beck.html