Skull Pilot
Diamond Member
- Nov 17, 2007
- 45,446
- 6,163
- 1,830
SO what? I really don't care that criminals kill each other to the extent they do here.
All I care about is that law abiding people have the right to defend themselves from the criminals that we don't lock up
But British people have the right to defend themselves too. Just not necessarily with a gun. But then hey, why do they need a gun? They're less likely to be killed anyway.
The problem is you've gone through all the arguments, been found wanting, then you come back with the simplistic "I want a gun", but you don't want to see the damage that guns have on your society, and that actually having a gun makes things WORSE than if you couldn't get a gun.
It's not guns that damage society it's criminals who use guns in the commission of crimes.
you want to ignore the fact that 3/4 or gun shot victims and 3/4 of all shooters have prior criminal histories, or that taking gang murders out of the equation lowers our murder rate to about 3000 per year
It's just not true that most murders are committed by previously law abiding people who happen to own guns who went berserk one day
we don't have a gun problem. We have other problems that contribute to our high crime rate
Sure, it's criminals. Now here's the problem, a criminal with a gun is far more a threat than a criminal without one. Also, a society that basically breeds criminals isn't a good society and has lots of criminals.
I'm not ignoring that many of the murderers had previous ARRESTS (criminal histories, as you put it), but then you want to take gangs out of the picture? Why is that? Gangs are still a part of society, and cause massive problems because the US breeds people into gangs.
I have spoken about this before and the biggest problem is often that the politicians won't do anything about sorting out the problems that exist within society, which causes more crime and criminals. It's an attitude which I hit every time I debate this. The whole "we're individuals, we should do anything", it's a circular argument which never gets anything solved.
We need guns because society is danger - society is dangerous because we refuse to do anything to solve it - because we don't solve it we need guns.
People who commit crimes with guns are an extreme minority of the population. I hardly call that "breeding criminals"
The fact is society as a whole is not in danger. There are isolated pockets of extremely high crime and murder in this country in mostly urban areas.
Yes, people who commit crimes with guns are a minority of the population. People who commit terrorist acts in the name of Islam are an even smaller portion of the Muslim world. And yet the right feels the need to put all Muslims in the same basket and declare them all dangerous.
Yes, there are areas of high crime and society doesn't seem to have the desire to solve any of these problems, just shove them under the carpet, right? You see a problem, er... well... um... nah, can't be bothered to solve that problem, nor that one. But hey, oh, there's a problem that we just made for ourselves by invading Iraq, er... yeah, we need to solve that one because 9 people died, but the problem where 10,000 people die, nah, that's not a problem. 9 people is people, 10,000 people is just a statistic, right?
Ah so this is just more 2 dimensional partisan thinking on your part. The right this the right that yada yada.
Before you start whining to me about Iraq I'll inform you that I have from day one never supported it unlike the democrats in congress who did.
So if society doesn't seem to want to solve them what's your problem with it?
I really do not give an iota of a fuck if a bunch of piece of shit gang bangers in some urban shit hole kill each other.