Owning Guns Doesn't Preserve Freedom

[KevinWestern]

Kevin -

I do agree with much of your thinking here - guns do not occur as a problem in isolation. As you say, they are linked to drugs, gangs, unemployment and poverty - and all of those feautres need to be tackled as well, if gun crime is ever to be brought to acceptable levels.

But disarming gangs is possible, and has been done elsewhere, even if to a lesser degree than would be required in the likes of Chicago.

My feeling is that tackling unemployment and drugs WITHOUT new gun laws would be largely pointless, because gun crime will remain high as long as gangs have access to guns.

Hopefully I’m not getting offtrack, but I think we’re touching on a reason that folks like me distrust President Obama and question his intent with regards to his approach to gun control.

Most Americans agree that gun violence is primarily isolated to poor areas like many of our inner city communities, and the solutions are going to be around keeping guns out of the hands of gangbangers, ect.

Why the heck are they spearheading the campaign with catch phrases like “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines”? Why would they go after the type of gun that kills 20 a year vs the laws around the type of gun that kills 7,000 a year?

It’s the approach that killed this legislation, in my view.

.

 

[Saigon]

Kevin -

I suspect that even if all gang-related deaths were removed from the statistics, gun crime in the US would still be the highest in the developed world. Tackling gun violence does not mean tackling gangs alone - only that tackling guns has to be a major part of the crackdown.

Unfortunately for Americans, groups like the NRA oppose common sense measures to restrict guns. Ironically, the NRA is the best friend any gang could have. That is why the legislation failed.

 

[Saigon]

Spoon -

gang members do not walk into a gun shop and buy a gun

No one said they did. But at the moment the laughable lack of real gun laws in the US actively assist gangs in doing what gangs do.

You can not crack down on gangs and not crack down on guns. To do so would be pointless. When it becomes impossible for a gang member to walk into a shop and legally buy an Uzi, you will be able to crack down more easily on illegal weapons.

At the moment, the gangs are winning.

like your reliable study from yesterday where the facts were just the opposite of what you stated?

Please try and post honestly.

 

[Spoonman]

Spoon -

gang members do not walk into a gun shop and buy a gun

No one said they did. But at the moment the laughable lack of real gun laws in the US actively assist gangs in doing what gangs do.

You can not crack down on gangs and not crack down on guns. To do so would be pointless. When it becomes impossible for a gang member to walk into a shop and legally buy an Uzi, you will be able to crack down more easily on illegal weapons.

At the moment, the gangs are winning.

like your reliable study from yesterday where the facts were just the opposite of what you stated?

Please try and post honestly.

what lack of gun laws? in CA you can't buy an AK or an AR. yet every gang banger has an AK or an AR. you can't have high capacity mags. yet everyone of them has them. where do they get them? do they care about the law ? no think they will care about a new law? don't be ridiculous. their gun store, the black market, is still open, alive and well

 

[bripat9643]

Kevin -

I suspect that even if all gang-related deaths were removed from the statistics, gun crime in the US would still be the highest in the developed world. Tackling gun violence does not mean tackling gangs alone - only that tackling guns has to be a major part of the crackdown.

Unfortunately for Americans, groups like the NRA oppose common sense measures to restrict guns. Ironically, the NRA is the best friend any gang could have. That is why the legislation failed.

If you eliminate murders by blacks and Hispanics, then the gun homicide rate for the USA would be the same as it is for those Lilly white western European countries. Mexico has very strict gun control laws. Yet, it has a murder rate 5 times higher than the murder rate in the USA. The homicide rate is the product of cultural issues, not the presence of guns.

 

[Spoonman]

honest like this?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7180568-post106.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7180602-post107.html

 

[KevinWestern]

Kevin -

I suspect that even if all gang-related deaths were removed from the statistics, gun crime in the US would still be the highest in the developed world. Tackling gun violence does not mean tackling gangs alone - only that tackling guns has to be a major part of the crackdown.

In my view, the correlation between poverty and gun violence is so extremely significant that if one does not consider it, I won't be able to take them seriously. When you compare gun homicide in Chicago, the poorest areas have a rate of around 45 deaths/100,000, whereas the richest areas have around 2-3/100,000. This is hugely significant!

Tackling gun violence might not mean tackling the gangs/poverty alone, but it needs to be noted that this is the #1 issue, period.

How many times do you think the news outlets used the words "assault rifles" in the recent gun control blitz vs words like "handguns" or "poverty"? I think that statistic would be quite interesting. I'm guessing it doesn't correlate to the homicide statistics (ie "handgun" is used the same % as it's involved in homicides, same with "assault weapon").

Again, I'm open for a discussion on laws, but I think the Democrats (and Obama) really didn't approach this too well.


.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Owning Guns Doesn't Preserve Freedom - Casey Michel - The Atlantic

Studies show there is very little correlation between heavily armed citizens and the presence of democracy in countries around the world.

After League City, Texas, became the first city in the state to pass a resolution effectively nullifying federal gun regulations in February, Councilwoman Heidi Thiess, who speared the motion, shared a quote. "Gen. Isoroku Yamamoto, who was the commander of Japan's WWII Combined Fleet, was asked why he never bothered to invade the U.S. after Pearl Harbor," she remarked. "And you know what he said? 'You can't invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.'"

It didn't matter that the quote is almost certainly false. The sentiment remains: The tether between that right to bear arms and the safety of liberal democracy is as real post-Newtown as it was following Pearl Harbor. And now that a handful of cities and counties across Texas have passed similar measures barring local officials from enforcing federal legislation, the link between your Glock and your unbridled freedoms becomes inseparable. "The Second Amendment was never meant for hunting, although that's what's been said over generations," Thiess continued. "It was a means of defense. Yes, self-defense, but also defense against our own government."

Personally, that attitude, the swaggering and blustering about how the nutter are gonna save us from the government or from invasion - its downright silly.

But, one can ignore the Mighty Mouse nonsense, its the rest of the article that's interesting.

When did democracy become the bellwether of freedom? Isn't it rather arrogant to think that only one form of government leads to freedom?

 

[Spoonman]

Kevin -

I suspect that even if all gang-related deaths were removed from the statistics, gun crime in the US would still be the highest in the developed world. Tackling gun violence does not mean tackling gangs alone - only that tackling guns has to be a major part of the crackdown.

In my view, the correlation between poverty and gun violence is so extremely significant that if one does not consider it, I won't be able to take them seriously. When you compare gun homicide in Chicago, the poorest areas have a rate of around 45 deaths/100,000, whereas the richest areas have around 2-3/100,000. This is hugely significant!

Tackling gun violence might not mean tackling the gangs/poverty alone, but it needs to be noted that this is the #1 issue, period.

How many times do you think the news outlets used the words "assault rifles" in the recent gun control blitz vs words like "handguns" or "poverty"? I think that statistic would be quite interesting. I'm guessing it doesn't correlate to the homicide statistics (ie "handgun" is used the same % as it's involved in homicides, same with "assault weapon").

Again, I'm open for a discussion on laws, but I think the Democrats (and Obama) really didn't approach this too well.


.

kevin, that is it exactly. we have to address the roots of the problem, not the symptoms. it's like if you have a sinue infection. you can take aspirin all day long. you feel a little better, the fever is down, but the problem doesn't go away. you continue to do damage to your body and it eventually manifests itself even worse. gun laws and regulations do not solve the problems. they penalize law abiding citizens. the vast majority. and only mask the real problems. the real fact is that only .000036 guns in the usa ever commit a crime. it is such a minute percentage. guns are not the problem. people ownings guns is not the problem. it is that minute percent that has to be addressed. and that minute percent does not follow any laws we put on the books.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

well not having them, doesnt help with freedom.......several examples of that...look it up

Most free countries have few guns and don't need them.

Most European countries have far lower rates of murder than the US, and without the guns. They also have more political choices than the US has, so to my mind, are also freer.

Most "free" countries are only free if you ignore the definition of freedom.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Invading the US is just logistically impossible (unless Mexico or Canada do it, in which case it would last about ten minutes), and was even more so at the time of Japan's suicidal provocation.

It isn't gun-toting private citizens that would stop a trained army in North America. There is no comparison to Afghanistan and the Afghanis. But illusions are marvelous things and some people need to cling to them for their sense of identity.

Personally, I have no problem with or fear of firearms. I do fear idiocy of every kind that endangers me and others, from voting to shooting.

We have the best trained military in the world and we are still fighting people who are less well armed than the average survivalist more than a decade after we invaded Afghanistan. Is it remotely possible that you know a lot less than you think you do about strategy and tactics?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

well not having them, doesnt help with freedom.......several examples of that...look it up

Most free countries have few guns and don't need them.

Most European countries have far lower rates of murder than the US, and without the guns. They also have more political choices than the US has, so to my mind, are also freer.

Not sure about the freedom part, but certainly more means of political expression.

Are you sure about that?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Spoon -

gang members do not walk into a gun shop and buy a gun

No one said they did. But at the moment the laughable lack of real gun laws in the US actively assist gangs in doing what gangs do.

You can not crack down on gangs and not crack down on guns. To do so would be pointless. When it becomes impossible for a gang member to walk into a shop and legally buy an Uzi, you will be able to crack down more easily on illegal weapons.

At the moment, the gangs are winning.

like your reliable study from yesterday where the facts were just the opposite of what you stated?

Please try and post honestly.

what lack of gun laws? in CA you can't buy an AK or an AR. yet every gang banger has an AK or an AR. you can't have high capacity mags. yet everyone of them has them. where do they get them? do they care about the law ? no think they will care about a new law? don't be ridiculous. their gun store, the black market, is still open, alive and well

and getting stronger everyday

 

[Sunshine]

Invading the US is just logistically impossible (unless Mexico or Canada do it, in which case it would last about ten minutes), and was even more so at the time of Japan's suicidal provocation.

It isn't gun-toting private citizens that would stop a trained army in North America. There is no comparison to Afghanistan and the Afghanis. But illusions are marvelous things and some people need to cling to them for their sense of identity.

Personally, I have no problem with or fear of firearms. I do fear idiocy of every kind that endangers me and others, from voting to shooting.

And just who would you keep away from the polls?

 

[Spoonman]

Spoon -



No one said they did. But at the moment the laughable lack of real gun laws in the US actively assist gangs in doing what gangs do.

You can not crack down on gangs and not crack down on guns. To do so would be pointless. When it becomes impossible for a gang member to walk into a shop and legally buy an Uzi, you will be able to crack down more easily on illegal weapons.

At the moment, the gangs are winning.



Please try and post honestly.

what lack of gun laws? in CA you can't buy an AK or an AR. yet every gang banger has an AK or an AR. you can't have high capacity mags. yet everyone of them has them. where do they get them? do they care about the law ? no think they will care about a new law? don't be ridiculous. their gun store, the black market, is still open, alive and well

and getting stronger everyday

the more you can't buy legally, the more it becomes available illegally

 

[Saigon]

the more you can't buy legally, the more it becomes available illegally

Nonsense - neither the UK, Germany nor France have a major problem with illegal weapons, nor do most other countries with safety-based laws.

 

[Saigon]

Kevin -

I suspect that even if all gang-related deaths were removed from the statistics, gun crime in the US would still be the highest in the developed world. Tackling gun violence does not mean tackling gangs alone - only that tackling guns has to be a major part of the crackdown.

In my view, the correlation between poverty and gun violence is so extremely significant that if one does not consider it, I won't be able to take them seriously. When you compare gun homicide in Chicago, the poorest areas have a rate of around 45 deaths/100,000, whereas the richest areas have around 2-3/100,000. This is hugely significant!

Tackling gun violence might not mean tackling the gangs/poverty alone, but it needs to be noted that this is the #1 issue, period.

How many times do you think the news outlets used the words "assault rifles" in the recent gun control blitz vs words like "handguns" or "poverty"? I think that statistic would be quite interesting. I'm guessing it doesn't correlate to the homicide statistics (ie "handgun" is used the same % as it's involved in homicides, same with "assault weapon").

Again, I'm open for a discussion on laws, but I think the Democrats (and Obama) really didn't approach this too well.


.

I do agree with you - but one has to change the root causes of violence, and not only the side-effects. That means tackling poverty first of all as the single largest causative factor, plus drugs, but also removing guns (which we know to be a causative feature of crime) from the equation.

The problem is, of course, that no one has a solution for poverty or for drugs at this stage. We all have ideas on both topics, but few of them can be shown to have worked. Hence, I'd tackle guns first, myself.

Let's be clear here - guns enable crime. Guns strengthen gangs.

To weaken gangs and reduce crime - guns must be removed from the equation, as must drugs. Without guns, gangs will find it harder to function, and will face greater resistance from the community.

 

[nitroz]

I agree.

But there are other reasons why owning a gun is good. You just gotta regulate it.

 

[jon_berzerk]

the more you can't buy legally, the more it becomes available illegally

Nonsense - neither the UK, Germany nor France have a major problem with illegal weapons, nor do most other countries with safety-based laws.

--LOL

surely you jest

Four held over 'machine gun' find in Liverpool
Four people have been arrested after police found what they believe is a machine gun at an address in Liverpool.

The arrests came after police stopped a car on Higher Road, Halewood, in the early hours and arrested two men on suspicion of going equipped for theft.

BBC News - Four held over 'machine gun' find in Liverpool

mexico where it is almost impossible to legally own a firearm

is flooded with guns

 

[Saigon]

Jon -

As I said, neither the UK, Germany or France have a major poblem with illegal weapons, and neither do most other countries with safety-based laws, such as Spain, Japan, Australia or Holland.