For all of you gun nuts...

[180crafter]

Again... Can I ride my gun to work??

And cars will always kill more people, because more people have cars.... Common sense.

What is the percent of car owners to death compared to gun owners to deaths?

That would surprise me.....

[Onizuka]

228,000,000 guns according to the 1998 FBI statistics and 207,754,000 automobiles according to the 1998 Federal Highway Administration registrations

90% of all violent crime in the U.S. does not involve any gun of any type. * 1998 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

Less than 1% of all guns will ever be used in the commission of any type of crime (much less violent crime). *FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994

Two-thirds of the people that die each year from gunfire are criminals shooting other criminals. * FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994

Guns prevent an estimated 2.5 million crimes a year, or 6,849 per day. * Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State Univ. (Often the gun is never fired and no blood (including the criminals) is shed)

Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes per day are prevented just by showing a handgun. In less than 0.9% of the time is the gun ever actually ever fired. * Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State Univ.

Every year, people in the United States use a gun to defend themselves against criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times- more than 6,500 people a day, or once every 13 seconds. * Fall 1995, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

92.7% of law enforcement officials believe that citizens should be able to purchase firearms for self-defense and sporting purposes. * 1999 Police Survey, National Assoc. of Chiefs of Police

[180crafter]

Can you also do Households and not total registrations? Most people who own a firearm own more than one...

Can separate the handguns from this??? I dont care if you have a rifle, or shotgun.

Thanks.

And it seems like you are very good at this. I have ben trying to do it all day, but the firewalls at work blobk almost everything that say gun in it.

[Cold_Zero]

180-The second to the last quote (9 posts from the top) that quoted me as saying "If the environmentalists had it their way, you wouldnt even OWN a car, you'de be riding an electric public bus everywhere. Same thing with the gun control people. Double standard." wasnt something I said. Not a big problem.bud

[The Mic]

well I'll chim in & play devil's advocate...

The topic of Gun Control can be found in the news every single day with either viewpoint being displayed. Regardless, the fact is that people die from guns and these tragic events can be prevented.

The main argument put forward against gun control is the second amendment of the constitution which reads as follows:

Amendment II: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The 2nd amendment provides a very powerful privilege to the citizens of the US but great power comes with great responsibility. Gun control is often attributed with trying to rape individuals of their right to bear arms but effective gun control only keeps the guns out of the hands of the criminals.

Many individuals believe that the second amendment is absolute and unmovable yet in actuality it is far from it. The first amendment of the constitution lays out the right to free speech but this does not mean you can say whatever you want wherever you would like. Can you go to a pre-school and curse like a sailor? What about sacrificing a female virgin to satisfy your God? Well you’re supposed to have freedom of religion right?

The second amendment is not absolute in any way. Do we allow convicts to bear arms? Of course not but if you take a literal definition of the amendment you would allow them that right. The second amendment need not be infringed to have effective gun control, all we have to do is work together on the important issue of saving lives.

Statistics are often brought in to the fray to show only a small percentage of group X died by firearms compared to drowning, electrocution, or automobile accidents. Yet, even though more people are hit by Mack trucks than by gun shot does that make that persons life any less important? If you could prevent a person from being murdered, would you? This is the question at hand my friends.

The fact is that every single day people die from firearms and those incidents can be barred. Again you may hear “it’s not the guns it’s the people”. Nevertheless, preventing these people from accessing the firearms in the first place will go a long way toward solving our problem with firearm violence. When was the last time you heard about a disgruntled employee going on a stabbing spree?

Currently on the books in the US 22,000 gun laws exist on the local, state and federal level. The problem with current gun control is two fold. First current gun laws need to be consolidated and updated to allow law enforcement the ability to correctly enforce them. Secondly, the laws need to become more proactive rather than reactive and the punishments more harsh. Gun control does work if enforced properly as proven in many countries across the globe.

If this restructuring and more restrictive gun laws could save just one solitary life would it be worth it? What if that life was your spouse, child, mother, father, sibling or friend would it be worth it then? How many lives must be at stake before you will consider acting?

Effective gun control is needed today however many are not willing to act. I ask you throw your prejudices aside and remember.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing -Edmund Burke

The timeless wisdom of Edmund Burke is very clear. Bad laws are indeed the worst sort of tyranny yet; effective gun control is far from bad law. Effective firearm control saves lives. A law that is capable of saving lives is far from bad.

[Cold_Zero]

And it seems like you are very good at this. I have ben trying to do it all day, but the firewalls at work blobk almost everything that say gun in it.

Most gun owners have to be well infromed, since we are attacked from all angles.

[Cold_Zero]

S13Guy-First, the right to bear firearms is not a privlidge but a right. The Second Amendement does not create or establish this right. It protects it from infringement by the Government. Now, I dont think its an "All or Nothing" right. Obviously we need to keep firearms away from certain sections of the population. I dont think that responsible gun owners would argue with you on that. Criminals, people with Mental Illinesses and the ability of minors to purchase fire arms are regulated by the Government for good reason. I appreciate your alternate view point on the issue. I have to go to an Impreza meeting, but I would like to re-read your post again to get everything out of it.bud

[180crafter]

Cold Zero:

1. I fixed the miss quote.

2. Understand what you say about the attacks, and am sorry if you feel like I am attacking you. I am attacking the idea that handguns are ok, when they definitely are not.

3. Im gonna take your gun from youand steal your Impreza.

S13Guy

Thanks for chiming in. Most anti-gun people are kinda wussy. Spineless liberals....

I agree with alot of things you say, especially with the constitution. I like how you used the 1st amendment as an example.

[Nismo_Freak]

but effective gun control only keeps the guns out of the hands of the criminals.

There is no such thing... you are asking criminals to adhere to a series of laws that they have already broken. Whats to prevent a criminal from breaking into a law abiding citizens home, killing their family with a knife bought from a grocery store and stealing their guns? Do you think now that the criminal is going to go, "oh my I'm not supposed to have these!" and return them to the police? Hell no, he'll use them.

Whats the one factor that could have prevented an armed assailant from killing that family? The police, lol. I don't think the bad guy is gonna wait around for the police to round him up while he's raping your wife and cutting up your kid. The only factor at the point of entry is to either scare the living crap out of the guy (he's armed with a knife, odds are this won't happen) so that he flees, or you can in turn produce your own weaponry and fight him. At the point you are staring down some 6' 200 lbs. criminal with a 6" knife in his hand, what would you want to have? A gun? A knife? How about a phone so you can dial 911 as he stabs you time after time? Hey at least they might be able to recognize the body!

Please... at that point in time ANYONE would want a freakin' AK47 loaded with the most lethal ammunition you can buy, and alot of it, and it better come out as fast as it possibly can. Let's face it... he's intruded into your home, he's trying to harm you and your family, and he's there to do it out of jealousy, greed, or maybe he just gets off on stabbing people. Frankly he deserves to get what he gets... and I don't care to hear about humanity... the guy is there to gut your family with a knife.

Shotgun? Ever have a shotgun misload, ever miss?, ever try negotiating a house in the dark with an armed assailant in it with a long *** shotgun (Cause the law says you can't shorten it). Needless to say which is easier to handle, a 20 lb. loaded shotgun or a 7 lb. loaded handgun?

What if your wife is the one that wakes up and you have to rely on a inexperienced shooter to save your life? Would you want her to have a manageable smaller caliber handgun or a 12 gauge pump action shotgun that kicks like a mule if you don't hold it properly?

Rifle? LOL... can you imagine trying to defend your family with a damn loaded 5 shot bolt-action .308 that's about 48" long? Needless to say a rifle is the LAST thing you want to fire in a populated space... the bullet has alot more spin and velocity compared to a handgun and will penetrate not only your walls but your neighbors.

In that scenario you save multiple lives at the cost of one worthless life.

[Nismo_Freak]

3. Im gonna take your gunS from you and steal your Impreza.

S13Guy

Thanks for chiming in. Most anti-gun people are kinda wussy. Spineless liberals.....

You could leave out the wussy and spineless remarks... cause "liberal" defines the two

[Onizuka]

Here is a good read.

http://www.gunfacts.info/GunFacts3.3Print.pdf

[Onizuka]

The topic of Gun Control can be found in the news every single day with either viewpoint being displayed. Regardless, the fact is that people die from guns and these tragic events can be prevented.

And more people die from tragic auto accidents, which can be prevented with the same kind of sweeping laws that lump everyone, including extremely responsible individuals (aka most gun owners, most car owners, you, me, freinds and family), into one pile.

But hey, why try and solve the root of crime when you can punish law abiding citizens?

[The Mic]

Some of you may have to re-read my previous post.........

The connotation of gun control to most is the removal of their ability to obtain and use firearms. In actuality, effective gun control is a balancing act between allowing law abiding citizen’s access and barring criminals. To totally remove the peoples rights to firearms would effectively allowing the strong to oppress the weak. If we remove the weapons from the hands of the criminals and put them in the hands of the peaceable citizens crime then confronts a difficult pass. There is an old adage “Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight”, effective gun control would put criminals in just that situation.

Gun control in the US gets a bad rap because lawmakers are so closed minded. It seems all our lawmakers in the US can do is ban more and more guns when the real solutions have little or no legislation. Effective gun control while in part prevents certain members of society from obtaining firearms is quite multifaceted. The current laws aimed at correcting gun violence in America are in most cases simply missing the mark and the laws that can actually help with the problem are extremely lax.

"America fails to incarcerate violent criminals. In 1960, 738 criminals were sent to prison for every 1,000 violent crimes, but by 1980, the number of criminals sent to prison per 1,000 violent crimes dropped to 227, and the crime rate tripled. Over 60,000 criminals convicted of violent crime every year _ murder, rape, robbery or aggravated assault _ are not sent to prison. Of America's 4.3 million convicted criminals, only 26% are in prison. The remaining 74% are serving "sentences" of parole or probation, free on the streets.[1]"

In the US today one can murder at age twenty and expect to be a free man by the time he is forty. This is simply not a tough enough penalty to deter criminals especially when you take into account the comfortable living provided by American prisons. Even the NRA supports stiffer penalties for gun crimes.[2] We have to make the risk so great criminals will choose another career path. Again effective gun control is not removing the right to firearms from lawful citizens yet the laws in this area are extremely negligent.

Another huge problem here in the US is accidental deaths from firearms. In 1995 there were 1,225 fatal gun accidents in the United States.[3] This statistic is heartbreaking because all of the deaths could have been prevented if the proper precautions were used. However, due to lack of education in firearms the vast majority of gun owners are clueless to those precautions. The law should require gun purchasers take mandatory firearm training classes before receiving their guns. Again the NRA supports this proposal[2] as well yet the government is slow to act.

Gun control is not exclusively limited to guns because guns themselves do not kill, people do. To effectively eliminate gun violence we must also deal with the reasons people commit crime in the first place. Study after study has found a direct correlation between the lack of education and violent crime.[4] All the while here in the US we continue to rape the budgets for K-12 education. Improved education is essential to winning the war on gun violence. Seems so simple doesn’t it, yet currently the US is doing little to rectify this problem.

Currently in the US if you are 18 you can purchase a rifle or shotgun, and at 21 any other firearm type. Not a big deal right? Take this statistic into consideration the demographic of ages 18-20 while only accounting for 4% of the population accounted for 24% of the total gun homicides in the US.[5] You may ask yourself why do these young people kill the way they do. One possible reason is the lack of education we have in our society producing angry young men as a substitute for educated young men. Another possible reason is simply immaturity. Whatever the reason why not raise the minimum age to purchase firearms to 25. Doing so would allow those people with pent up anger against the world time to work things out before they could obtain a gun.

The bottom line is gun control is saving lives from gun violence. The plain and simple truth is the current policy on gun control in the US is too lax and something has to be done. Inaction leads to more death from guns, is that acceptable?

[1] http://www.firearmsandliberty.....html [2] http://www.nraila.org/ [3] http://www.hpjc.org/issues_guncontrol.html[4] http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=237[5] http://www.ustreas.gov/press/r...t.pdf

[The Mic]

And more people die from tragic auto accidents, which can be prevented with the same kind of sweeping laws that lump everyone, including extremely responsible individuals (aka most gun owners, most car owners, you, me, freinds and family), into one pile.

please read the whole thing :

Statistics are often brought in to the fray to show only a small percentage of group X died by firearms compared to drowning, electrocution, or automobile accidents. Yet, even though more people are hit by Mack trucks than by gun shot does that make that persons life any less important? If you could prevent a person from being murdered, would you? This is the question at hand my friends.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But hey, why try and solve the root of crime when you can punish law abiding citizens?

[The Mic]

Eh, I just couldn't wait

S13Guy-First, the right to bear firearms is not a privlidge but a right.

Main Entry: 1priv·i·legePronunciation: 'priv-lij, 'pri-v&-Function: nounEtymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin privilegium law for or against a private person, from privus private + leg-, lex law: a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor : PREROGATIVE; especially : such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office

http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin...ilege
Modified by S13GUY at 5:34 PM 9/14/2004

[Mr1der]

way I see it, you want to get rid of handguns, then I damn sure better have the right to strap an AK on my back to protect myself from people hiding the now illegal handguns.

if you don't like the sight of me walking down the street strapped with an AK, well too bad, it's a damn shame my concealable handgun is now illegal.

[Nismo_Freak]

Big Post outlining thoughts on "Effective Gun Control"

Don't get me wrong... I'm not for a "Wild West" with everyone packing 9's to the hilt and goin out guns blazin.

However, like many things on the liberal agenda, your idea for "Effective" gun control does not float in a real ocean. It does not prevent criminals from illegally obtaining firearms (check the numbers of registered firearm murders vs. illegal firearm murders), and it does not prevent the importation of illegal firearms, in fact it would INCREASE the importation of illegal firearms (see: "War on Drugs"). My uncle is a parole officer, and can attest to this fact.

By definition a criminal is someone that has broken a law or laws, so what is a simple thing like another law going to do other than give the prosecutor more ammo after the criminal commits another crime?

I agree with a greater level of education, because honestly laws don't stop people from killing each other. Education can however be a positive force in preventing accidental gun deaths, like 5 yr. olds blowin their little brother's head off.

[BaliLover]

Just so you can get a good idea of where are founding fathers were coming from when they drafted the constitution, take a good read of the Declaration of Independance http://www.archives.gov/nation....html and see what they're complaints were and why the drafted the document. The declaration of independence was more like a declaration of war, a mass of people saying they weren't gonna take it anymore.

Notice they also used the term inalienable.

Main Entry: in·alien·able Pronunciation: (")i-'nAl-y&-n&-b&l, -'nA-lE-&-n&-Function: adjectiveEtymology: probably from French inaliénable, from in- + aliénable alienable: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred <inalienable rights>

[The Mic]

your idea for "Effective" gun control does not float in a real ocean. It does not prevent criminals from illegally obtaining firearms

You still don't get it..I am for having firearms for use of self-defense. When did I say I was anti-firearm? Maybe you'd get that through your thick head if you'd get out of your "liberal vs conservative, left vs right " boxed world . The US today is consumed with firearm violence. Thousands die at the hands of gun crime every year. Don’t fool yourself, this is a malignant disease that left unchecked will only grow. So what can we do? The answer is simple; gun control is the proven remedy. Also this remedy need not rape law abiding citizens of their right to bear arms.

Gun control in the US is extremely lax and needs to be strengthened. Once more the gun control laws America needs do not infringe law abiding citizen’s rights to self defense. Again the question; are you comfortable with the number of deaths caused by gun violence in America today?

[ilovedrifting]

I don't feel like ranting, this says it all

[Nismo_Freak]

You still don't get it..I am for having firearms for use of self-defense. When did I say I was anti-firearm? Maybe you'd get that through your thick head if you'd get out of your "liberal vs conservative, left vs right " boxed world . The US today is consumed with firearm violence. Thousands die at the hands of gun crime every year. Don’t fool yourself, this is a malignant disease that left unchecked will only grow. So what can we do? The answer is simple; gun control is the proven remedy. Also this remedy need not rape law abiding citizens of their right to bear arms.

Gun control in the US is extremely lax and needs to be strengthened. Once more the gun control laws America needs do not infringe law abiding citizen’s rights to self defense. Again the question; are you comfortable with the number of deaths caused by gun violence in America today?

When did I say you were anti-firearm?

Re-read what I said and stop attacking my personal figure. I simply stated that your ideology lacks a common factor that even the current laws cover. It only makes firearms harder to get ahold of for law abiding citizens (I have no quarrel with the current grace period and background checks, they are good systems to prevent emotional crime). If someone does not follow the laws then it does not prevent them in the least from obtaining a firearm.

Whats to prevent me from buying guns legally and selling them on the market to criminals? A few laws? How many guns do you think I could sell before the police has enough on me to nail me?

In that aspect there is no real "effective" gun control.

[The Mic]

Sorry, I don't like people associating the word liberal with me.You keep bringing up the fact that individuals can still obtain guns illegally. I support arms for protecting yourself from these individuals. Understand now?

Many violent criminals, ineligible to purchase firearms themselves, acquire guns from individuals who buy guns in bulk. Why not limit the number of weapons a person can purchase during a time period.

There are small lightweight guns currently on the market that are unreliable making them ineffective at self defense. These weapons often referred to as “Saturday Night Specials” or “junk guns” have special appeal to criminals for being easily concealable. Why not ban these weapons they are too unreliable to be of use in self defense.

Even a law requiring trigger locks to be equipped on all firearms while simple can prevent accidental death.

Gun shows is the easiest way to sell and acquire arms because there are no requirements on background checks. When you purchase a gun at a dealer you are required to undergo a background check. However, at a gun show non dealers sell guns and therefore a background check is not required by law. Background checks should be obligatory at every gun show.

there is no real "effective" gun control.

[1]Let me point out two crucial points. In 1994 a steep drop in gun crimes and in 1998 the numbers trend northward again. Let me explain the reasons behind those changes; in two words gun control. The Brady bill was signed into law in 1994 and marked a 4 year decline in gun crimes however in 1998 under the “sunset provision” the 5 day waiting period required by the Brady bill was removed.[2]

This proves two things:

* Gun Control Works! * The 5 day waiting period worked and needs to be brought back

Gun control is about saving the lives of neighbors, friends, family and loved ones not about taking away your guns or your right to bear arms. The stigma of the name often turns people off from the outset but if more knew the true nature of gun control then maybe we will get the laws we need to dispose of this troublesome issue of gun crime.

Ask yourself are you content with 453,737 gun crimes and murders when there is something that can be done.

[1] http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm[2] http://www.bradycampaign.org/f...=wait
Modified by S13GUY at 9:21 PM 9/14/2004

[BaliLover]

And what exactly can be done? Take a look at countries with strick gun control, regulation, or complete gun bans. CRIME ROSE. Thats right, guns were made illegal, harder to get, etc and crime went UP.

If its harder for an honest citizen to get a gun, they are less likely to jump through all the governmental hoops, and in the end, less likely to get a gun. Criminals know this and don't care, because they have NO hoops to jump through, if they want one they can get one, no questions asked. So while you have to wait 5 days, fill out mountains of paperwork, get fingerprints, background checks, etc., the people who are supposed to be prevented from getting guns are laughing because its just as easy as it always was for them to get one.

Registration leads to regulation which in turn leads to confiscation. I don't need make the same mistakes the the UK, Australia, and Canada have.

Its funny, firearms have been around ALOT longer than Automobiles, yet while gun crime is at a 30 year low, Death by automobiles just keeps getting higher.

[driverdriver]

Gun control works check out Canada's crime rates.

(1.) we have no "massacre" shootings(2.) our violent crime rate is one of the lowest in the world even in our largest metropolitan areas such a greater Vancouver (population 4.5 million) and greater Toronto (population 9.5 million)(3.)if you want you can still legally obtain a gun up here by obtaining and passing a proper firearms training and safetly course, however you cannot own a banned weapon such an a semi-automatic, automatic or assault rifle. And whatever you own, you can only own one of.

[The Mic]

its funny, people still bring up statements and rhetorical questions that have been addressed already

[gabossie]

Gun control will obviously never be 100% effective, and I think this is what alot of you are missing. No, nothing will ever SOLVE the problem completely, but the goal is to work towards a better solution than we have now, and doing nothing is far from moving foreward. Age and education are the two biggest factors in gun violence. We can all agree that better education in both schools and for gun owners would make a reasonble dent in the number of gun deaths, unfortunatly we aren't doing anything about that and it does not relate directly to gun control legislation. Age though, is what could have the biggest effect. As shown by the graph S13GUY posted, the highest number of gun homicides is by people between the ages of 17-21 or so, by a LARGE margine. Why have we not addressed this issue? Why not restrict guns till age 25, or even 21! What use does an 18 year old KID have for a gun besides receation? Defense? From who? Other 18-20 year olds for the most part. What portion of American society has a home and family to defend at age 18?

Nothing will every keep firearms out of the hands of those that are truely motivated to posses and commit crimes with them, but EFFECTIVE GUN CONTROL can reduce the number of people that have them by keeping the less motivated people from accessing such firearms. There is no black and white, motivated criminal/good law abiding citizen. There is a gradiant, and the more of that gradient you can cut out, the fewer violent firearm related crimes you will see.

Oh, and ilovedrifting, if you would please refrain from participating in a debate which you have nothing intelligent to contribute, I think we'd ALL appreciate it.
Modified by gabossie at 9:37 PM 9/14/2004

[gabossie]

Violent Crime in Canada

The violent crime rate in Canada has fallen 11 percent since 1993.

The homicide rate for Canada went down 7 percent in 2003 to its lowest level in over 35 years. A total of 548 homicides were reported to police.

http://canadaonline.about.com/...3.htm

What the hell do automobile deaths have to do with gun control? And if violent crime is at an all time low, does that mean we should stop working on it? It's still to high.

[Nismo_Freak]

Sorry, I don't like people associating the word liberal with me.You keep bringing up the fact that individuals can still obtain guns illegally. I support arms for protecting yourself from these individuals. Understand now?

I was never at a misunderstanding of your stance?

Either way I'm done making my point.

BTW, that graph shows a decline 1 year before 94

[Onizuka]

Gun shows is the easiest way to sell and acquire arms because there are no requirements on background checks. When you purchase a gun at a dealer you are required to undergo a background check. However, at a gun show non dealers sell guns and therefore a background check is not required by law. Background checks should be obligatory at every gun show.Modified by S13GUY at 9:21 PM 9/14/2004

Thats not true, it is still illegal to buy a handgun without a backround check, the fellow I work with says last time he bought a gun at a gun show they ran his nam though a computer before he was allowed to take it. Stats show that less than 0.7% of convicts bought their guns at gun shows, and near 93% are obtained illegally (stolen, street corner, etc). Gun shows are not people selling guns to people, they are dealers selling arms or people selling only non-munitions. All gun dealers are federally licensed and must follow federal and state rules for sale regardless of weather they are in the store or at a gun show. In fact, half the dealers at gun shows arent selling guns at all!

[Onizuka]

Gun control works check out Canada's crime rates.

(1.) we have no "massacre" shootings(2.) our violent crime rate is one of the lowest in the world even in our largest metropolitan areas such a greater Vancouver (population 4.5 million) and greater Toronto (population 9.5 million)(3.)if you want you can still legally obtain a gun up here by obtaining and passing a proper firearms training and safetly course, however you cannot own a banned weapon such an a semi-automatic, automatic or assault rifle. And whatever you own, you can only own one of.

Canada has never had any massacre shootings, and crime rate there has always been low. Same thing with england and all the other countries used as examples of how low crime rate is. School shootings have been documented as long ago as 1974 in the US, and since then, more laws and more shootings.

Israel has a gun homecide rate WAY lower than the US, and they have no gun control at all. Everyone in Israel is required to serve military time, so they are all educated in gun operation and safety.

I would definatly be FOR required gun safety courses, simpily because it will teach new gun owners how to be responsible with their firearms.

I would definatly NOT be for baning various rifles and handguns, because the only people these kind of laws effect are the ones who will follow them (IE, not criminals).