Shooting

[zigzag]

Personally, I'm pretty tired of this debate. The studies are endless, and there is data to support any agenda, even if it is insufficient, and plenty of misinterpretation of data and cognitive dissonance to go around. The genie is out of the bottle. I'm afraid that gun control regulation is an impotent solution at this point without enforcing current laws and regulating the gun industry, itself. I personally believe that the NRA is poison, the 2nd amendment is an anachronism, and that civilians don't need assault rifles or weapons that hold massive numbers of rounds or can be converted to rapid fire systems. People find ways to get around laws in the principles of civil disobedience and individual freedom.

 

We are a sick society, and there are just too many nuts and a$$holes.

[Megafrog]

Now I see what you did... It was the way you presented the data that didn't make sense to me. You left out the big number.

 

In the period of 1987-1992 there were an average of 667,000 hand gun crimes per year, and 10,600 of those 667,000 crimes were murders. In that same period there were 82,500 defensive uses of firearms annually in the 667,000 crimes.

 

Or in list form...

 

1982-1992 we averaged per year:

 

667,000 gun crimes

82,500 defensive uses of guns in those crimes

10,600 murders in those crimes

 

I wonder what the number of gun crimes would be as well as murders using guns if you banned guns? The criminals won't give up their guns because they don't follow laws.

[Black Dog]

The criminals won't give up their guns because they don't follow laws.

 

As I believe, Pinch (who lives in Sweden, where guns are banned) has pointed out so personally.

[surfpup]

I wonder what the number of gun crimes would be as well as murders using guns if you banned guns? The criminals won't give up their guns because they don't follow laws.

 

Isn't that a little silly though since this has never been and will never be on the table in the US? It isn't an all or nothing equation.

[Dub-T-123]

I can’t think of a law that was created with the expectation that every criminal would willingly abide. The point of making a law is to have a means to punish non compliance.

[surfpup]

Guns aren't actually banned in Sweden, btw.

 

"A license-holder may own up to six hunting rifles, ten handguns, or a mix of eight rifles and handguns. Firearms must be stored in an approved safe. A firearm registered for sport shooting may not be used for hunting. A concealed carry permit can be obtained under very special circumstances, such as a proven threat to life."

 

This site explains the country's regulations

 

http://www.sweden.org.za/gun-laws-in-sweden.html

 

Here is a comparison of crime in Sweden and the US

 

[Riffster]

Isn't that a little silly though since this has never been and will never be on the table in the US? It isn't an all or nothing equation.

 

I think this is where this argument goes and I think it is precisely to sabotage discussion.

 

I own a 1911 and a shotgun, I like having them and having a chance to defend myself in my own house.

 

My guitarist/singer friend has stuff with those automatic kits installed or whatever they are called I have shot them at the firing range (State owned) and these things are shockingly brutal, itdors make you think why in the hell a civilian can own something like this.

 

Sure you don't want to turn into Mexico either where gun restrictions are super strict and all criminals own guns and know most people do not have the ability to defend themselves.

 

If you are one of those guys that think that you need guns in case the government comes after you well, they have bigger stuff and they will go "David Karesh" on you.

 

Another argument is that knifes, cars, etc are all weapons. Well sure but they do not have the range and power of a tactical rifle.

 

Let's put it this way, an aggressor is out to kill you at any time, you don't know when or where, YOU get to chose their weapon, car, truck, rock, knife, or tactical rifle with a bump stock, would you really choose the rifle?

[brc]

This has been a debate literally for years, and I don’t see it ending any time soon.

I have quite a few guns from hand guns, rifles, shot guns, and even some of the “ Saturday night specials”

Even if guns were banned where I live, I’ll be damned if I would ever surrender my guns.

But I do agree that I can’t see why any one would have the need for an automatic , whether it be full auto or bump stock.

But no one in their right mind could possible think that the criminals would ever surrender their guns.

The law abiding citizen is paying the price for the deranged lunatics.

[american cheez]

new content in this thread is blatantly political. several pages of it, in fact. also, ad hominem attacks using foul language. and yet, as of this post, it's still open. yet somehow i'm the one in the wrong for insisting the rules be enforced the same for everyone? it's complete b.s. there is no excuse for it.

[Digger]

This has been a debate literally for years, and I don’t see it ending any time soon.

I have quite a few guns from hand guns, rifles, shot guns, and even some of the “ Saturday night specials”

Even if guns were banned where I live, I’ll be damned if I would ever surrender my guns.

But I do agree that I can’t see why any one would have the need for an automatic , whether it be full auto or bump stock.

But no one in their right mind could possible think that the criminals would ever surrender their guns.

The law abiding citizen is paying the price for the deranged lunatics.

 

 

Gov't will never get the 300,000.000 guns out of people's hands now, it's too late. A mandatory buy-back like we had after the Port Arthur massacre would never work there because I doubt they know who has what. The fact that any hint of a change to laws causes a rush on guns and ammo gives us an indication of what will happen if they tried.

 

However Class C licences and "Bump Stocks" will likely go after this one, without too much objection.