How many DPers own or support guns?

I've been pepper sprayed. The effect was very much like eating mexican food -- and I love Mexican food.

Compare using pepper spray with stepping on someones toes -- both are about equally effective.

 

It just pisses them off

 

No, I don't have a gun.

 

But you... live in Texas!

 

Not really. Obviously there's guns in the UK (mainly in the cities), but it's alot rarer than in the US, guns are a lot more serious over here, if you have one here you probably doing something dodgy. If our police carried guns, more of our criminals would, that's a fact.
Cases of gang rape are rare too, and we have pepper spray (which is illegal?) and there's loads of things for women to protect themselves with. I don't know of any girls who would want to carry a gun on them.

The thing I don't get is how some people in the US are anti-nukes, but pro-guns? In my eyes they serve the same purpose really (protection, an eye for an eye), but guns are abused more frequently.

 

I have a glove gun and it owns.

 

Really? I heard happy slapping was a rave over there

 

We aren't anti-nukes... We love nukes, we just don't want anyone else with them

Also the idea behind arming the citizen is not only to level the playing field, it also makes a criminal think twice if they think someone could be packing heat, where as in the UK, they know for sure that they are the only ones with the guns.

 

Big difference between gang rape and happy slapping.
Happy slapping originated from inner city schools, people used to go round slapping the back of peoples heads and shouting 'happy slap'. It escalated and there were a few cases of people being beaten and one guy was set on fire, but I think there was only 2 or 3 of these. I don't think anyone would need to be armed because of happy slaps.

 

Yeah, next time a bunch of armed criminals go for a lone womans handbag, they'd think twice because she could be 'packing heat'? No. As I said, guns are pretty rare in this country, I think the less people who have them, the better. But I guess it's a culture thing, US is 'shoot first, ask questions later', UK has a minimal force approach.

Gun homicides per 100,000 population:
England & Wales = 0.15
US = 3.6
(2003 figures)

 

I own several rifles, but no hand guns. I will after Ohio conceled carry license...

 

Really?

A GANG of 20 thugs took photographs of a 13-year-old girl on their mobile phones as she was punched and kicked.

David Morley, a 38-year-old barman, was beaten to death on 30 October last year by a gang of four young people.

On the 21st May 2005 it was reported that Caroline Monk, a columnist in Closer magazine had been attacked by a group of youths who knocked her to the ground and called her a 'slaphead'.

18th June 2005 there are reports of the first 'Happy Slapping rape' referring to the case of three 14-year-old boys accused of raping an 11-year-old girl and filming it on a mobile phone.

In Northern Ireland groups of youths have filmed vicious attacks on firecrews. Two youths were convicted for setting fire to a man during a "happy slap" in 2005.

On 8 June 2005, it was reported that a 17-year-old girl was shot with an air rifle and filmed in Wortley area of Leeds, Britain.

That's what I found in 10 minutes...

Your point being? Just because they use something besides a gun to kill doesn't mean there's any less killers.... killers will kill regardless of what tool they have to use.

 

Pretty weak.

You're confusing 'happy slap' with 'people being attacked whilst a mobile phone records it'. Just because people record someone being hit doesn't mean it's a happy slap. For example, whenever there was a fight in my school, you would have about 20 camera phones out and ready to record the fight. I don't even think that's the point, you're saying that there would be less acts of this kind of violence if guns were easier to obtain in the UK? So that 11 year old girl would've shot those boys, and that 13 year old girl would've whipped out a glock and started laying into those pussies? I don't think that's the case, I think if guns were easier to obtain it would result in more 'happy slap' incidents.

You said yourself in the second statement that 'killers will kill regardless', well these kinds of people will do these kinds of acts regardless of whether a phone is pointing at them.

US - 300 Million Population
"Firearms were used in 65.6 percent of the murders in 2000"
"There were an estimated 15,517 murders in 2000"

UK - 60 Million Population
"March 1999 - March 2000 = 760" - Murders

You have 5x as much population, but 20x more murders? 65% of which are as a result of firearms, and you can honestly say that guns protect people and killers will kill regardless? I beg to differ

 

"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically 'right.' Guns ended that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work." -- L. Neil Smith, The Probability Broach

 

I'm not confusing anything, I'm just going by what Wiki and the news have reported it to be. Since there's several different definitions you could argue it either way.

Would these thugs, rapists and murderrers think twice about attacking a lone man if they knew he could be carrying a concealed gun to shoot them with? Maybe, maybe not...

But I do know if I was one of those people being attacked, and I had a choice of having no self defense, or having a concealed handgun to shoot them with, I would take the handgun and give them what they had coming.

having more murders doesn't mean it's a result of guns, it just means there's more murders. I could say it was because of thousands of factors, including education, location, etc...

We most likely have 5x more unemployed, 5x more uneducated and 5x more lower class (i'm not really sure and haven't checked, just a guess). These are all factors to consider... again, just because guns were available for those murders, doesn't mean the same people wouldn't have used a knife, poison, baseball bat or whatever else instead...

 

Letting people carry arms in public is in my oppinion a oppurtunity for more violence by guns.

A lot of times when people get mad they use force to back up their words or thoughts and then you would have a serious problem if someone carries a gun and starts using it.

Example:

Public market place,

Crowded market place with people shopping for groceries and such and imagine everyone carrying a gun being it consealed or in the open.

A arguments arrises because someone bumped into someone and before you know it one of the two or out of a crowd of people pulls a gun and shoots the other one.

Bullets fly everywhere and innocent people get hurt and if i would be there and i had a gun to use i really wouldn't care if you did not intent to shoot my Mother for instance...i would shoot to kill without hesitation.

It would be a shooting festival galore.

People like to use guns to enforce their oppinions and words therefor it is in my oppinion a bad idea to let people carry guns in public.


If you want to keep guns inhouse to defend yourself i would not see a problem with that.
Of course neighbourly arguments can also escalate but that is a far lesser problem in contrast to let people carry guns in public.

And if a Goverment turns rogue then the guns are there to stand up for yourself as well although i don't personally see any victory but people of course sure as hell want to try.

When it's war it's war.

 

Except, of course, that none of that actually happens.

In states where right-to-carry laws are passed, crime decreases.

 

I agree it is kind of a dramatic example but it all comes down to individuals that have an argument for some reason and want to back up the talk with action.

And when someone decides to take action mostly the most violent or convenient way to win is being used.

I have seen it lot's of times, people want to win and in their anger they really don't care how.

I've been in such situations myself.

And if in those situations guns where freely available and everyone was carrying i might not be here participating on this forum.

Keep the guns inhouse is all i ever tried to say.

 

Except... here in Arizona, anyone over 18 (and no felonies) can carry a gun, and can conceal it (with an 8 hour permit). Just 2 days ago for example I saw a holstered handgun on a man in walmart at 2 AM.

Guess what? Nobody got shot, bullets weren't flying everywhere, everyone was ok!

Where do you come up with this stuff? Most people are rational enough not to shoot someone over a petty argument. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but those same people would just use a different weapon if they didn't have guns.

Except you're more likely to get assaulted or robbed when you're not at home...

 

yo-yo wrote:

Like i said Yo-yo it's kind of an dramatic example so please don't digg to deep into this.

Yo-yo wrote:

When i say argument i don't of course mean a petty argument but the kind that stands on the point of escalation to violence by either side.
Don't try to downplay it my friend.

Yo-yo wrote:

And most likely you wouldn't have the chance to pull out your gun if it happens...