Fuck u all.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Entropic

You mean like the rates for the disarmed citizens of every other first world country on the planet? Those same rates that are lower than American rates?

Look at the numbers. At the very best, there's no correlation between gun ownership and violence. At the very worst, there's a correlation between an increase of guns and an increase of violence.

First off We're talking about the U.S.

Second Compare The victim rates from Illinois (Chicago is the most restrictive on legal Firearms Ownership) to Vermont (Basically no restrictions on Legal Firearms ownership).

Then get back to me.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Entropic

It's recorded rapes.

South Africa would have to almost have to double their number of reported rapes to surpass the United States, and the have roughly 1/10th of the population, which is why I think the United States surpasses them.

Either way, being #1 or #2 isn't a good thing.

Only one in thirty six rapes in South Africa are reported. What I'm saying is while its likely that the US is the worst of the developed countries, its very unlikely its the worst in all the world.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

First off We're talking about the U.S.

Second Compare The victim rates from Illinois (Chicago is the most restrictive on legal Firearms Ownership) to Vermont (Basically no restrictions on Legal Firearms ownership).

Then get back to me.

First off you don't exist in a vacuum.

Second, compare the violent crime rates (victim rates are meaningless) from Maine (More restrictive than Illinois) to Vermont (in your words, basically no restrictions). Maine has less violent crime. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_i..._States#States If you cherry pick your data, you can support any conclusion.

Saya, what is the website that is from? It seems it has been starred out. I'd like to look at the data.

[KontanKarite]

I would conclude that it's not the gun, but the culture.

I have a hard time coming to the conclusion that just because a gun exists in the hands of a layman, that that person simply becomes more violent from the get go.

If I were to put a gun in your hands, would you immediately become more violent?

If that were the case, then that would be some rather funny mental alchemy.

[Saya]

http://www.r@pe.co.za/index.php?opti...=875&Itemid=69

you're going to have to replace the @ with an a, Gnet censors the word r@pe.

[KontanKarite]

I would conclude that it's not the gun, but the culture.

I have a hard time coming to the conclusion that just because a gun exists in the hands of a layman, that that person simply becomes more violent from the get go.

If I were to put a gun in your hands, would you immediately become more violent?

If that were the case, then that would be some rather funny mental alchemy.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

If I were to put a gun in your hands, would you immediately become more violent?

Yes. Absolutely.

If that were the case, then that would be some rather funny mental alchemy.

You ain't just whistlin' Dixie.

[Kalitrima]

Oh, certainly. As someone who wants to start collecting weapons but not use them, I can agree. I just recently found out that my grandmother left me multiple guns (Grandma Dixie was, is, and always will be awesome. I miss her.), and all I want them for is just to look at. I don't want to fire them at a range, much less at someone. Heck, I'm not even gonna bring any ammunition when I take it home. The way I figure it, it's safer in my hands if it's not loaded. And if anyone DOES break into my house, I would think that it'd just be the sight of the gun that would scare them off. I don't think I'd have to prove to them that yes, there are bullets in the revolver and yes, it's in prime working condition. Same logic follows with my knife. If I need to defend myself, I would think that looking intimidating (and maybe a bit crazy) is of greater value than actually being able to attack.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

I would conclude that it's not the gun, but the culture.

I have a hard time coming to the conclusion that just because a gun exists in the hands of a layman, that that person simply becomes more violent from the get go.

If I were to put a gun in your hands, would you immediately become more violent?

If that were the case, then that would be some rather funny mental alchemy.

The culture is influenced by laws, which usually dictate how a gun is used.

It's not that a gun in the hand of a layman will result in a person becoming more violent. It's that without barriers to prevent already violent people from having guns, more violence will ensue. Those barriers include gun control laws, gun registeries, and control over ammunition and firearms.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Entropic

The culture is influenced by laws, which usually dictate how a gun is used.

It's not that a gun in the hand of a layman will result in a person becoming more violent. It's that without barriers to prevent already violent people from having guns, more violence will ensue. Those barriers include gun control laws, gun registeries, and control over ammunition and firearms.

Well that is a question of Repeat Violent Offenders getting their hands on firearms,not really the Non-violent (If given a choice) Responsible Citizens that make up the larger number of firearms owners.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Well that is a question of Repeat Violent Offenders getting their hands on firearms,not really the Non-violent (If given a choice) Responsible Citizens that make up the larger number of firearms owners.

Says who? Cite sources when you make claims.

And stop dropping my points and not responding to things I say. It's getting really annoying when I make a point and you don't respond.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Entropic

Says who? Cite sources when you make claims.

And stop dropping my points and not responding to things I say. It's getting really annoying when I make a point and you don't respond.

Says you...

Originally Posted by Entropic

It's that without barriers to prevent already violent people from having guns, more violence will ensue. Those barriers include gun control laws, gun registeries, and control over ammunition and firearms.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Says you...

I was inspecific. My question to says who was to "Responsible Citizens that make up the larger number of firearms owners.", not the whole statement.

Still, stop dropping points.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by KontanKarite

I would conclude that it's not the gun, but the culture.

I have a hard time coming to the conclusion that just because a gun exists in the hands of a layman, that that person simply becomes more violent from the get go.

If I were to put a gun in your hands, would you immediately become more violent?

If that were the case, then that would be some rather funny mental alchemy.

Exactly, it's cultural. If you give a gun to a person who is brought up in a culture where guns are banned because they are representative of violence, putting a gun in their hand does not make them more savage. But that's a primitive way of looking at it, because that isn't what happens. You're talking about gun users brought up in a culture where firearms are acceptable, which will naturally breed a different mindset to a culture where they are not.

[Catch]

I don't know why this post is getting so much attention. There probably is something wrong with the people on the forum.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Catch

I don't know why this post is getting so much attention. There probably is something wrong with the people on the forum.

I thought it was a good example of cohesive thread derailment.

[ape descendant]

...cars are worse... lets outlaw cars....they kill more people... it will be fun... and it will be good for the environment.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Think about how much higher those rates would be if law abiding Citizens were disarmed.

So essentially, you're arguing that Americans are inherently more savage and violent than other human beings, and thus we need more weapons to protect ourselves from ourselves?

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

First off We're talking about the U.S.

Second Compare The victim rates from Illinois (Chicago is the most restrictive on legal Firearms Ownership) to Vermont (Basically no restrictions on Legal Firearms ownership).

Then get back to me.

Vermont is nothing but dairy farmers and hippy cults. Chicago is what, the third largest city in the country?

[KissMeDeadly]

We need restrictions on guns, but not outright outlawing them tomorrow. I mean, what are all the people with guns already going to do? Is the government supposed to come and take them, or would they still be legal to have them? In that case, they *will* get sold, and they *will* fall into the hands of the kind of people who don't need guns.

Instead of taking things away as a means of getting rid of them, I would suggest some sort of anti-gun initiative, talking "The More you Know" PSA's, school guest speakers talking about the dangers of guns, etc. Do this for a good number of years and try to get the notion that 'Guns are bad' to be popular before outright banning.

Guns are waaaaay to ingrained in our culture, and I can assure you that to suddenly make them illegal would cause a lot of police offices to get shot. (YEW AINT TAKIN MAH SHAWTGUN BOY I DON'T LIKE NO ****** PERZIDANT)

The thought that prohibition without social change is just nonsense. Didn't your mom ever tell you not to do something, but you did it anyway, because she didn't explain why you shouldn't do it? Same thing. This nation literally wouldn't exist if not for guns.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

We need restrictions on guns, but not outright outlawing them tomorrow. I mean, what are all the people with guns already going to do? Is the government supposed to come and take them, or would they still be legal to have them? In that case, they *will* get sold, and they *will* fall into the hands of the kind of people who don't need guns.

Instead of taking things away as a means of getting rid of them, I would suggest some sort of anti-gun initiative, talking "The More you Know" PSA's, school guest speakers talking about the dangers of guns, etc. Do this for a good number of years and try to get the notion that 'Guns are bad' to be popular before outright banning.

Guns are waaaaay to ingrained in our culture, and I can assure you that to suddenly make them illegal would cause a lot of police offices to get shot. (YEW AINT TAKIN MAH SHAWTGUN BOY I DON'T LIKE NO ****** PERZIDANT)

The thought that prohibition without social change is just nonsense. Didn't your mom ever tell you not to do something, but you did it anyway, because she didn't explain why you shouldn't do it? Same thing. This nation literally wouldn't exist if not for guns.

I don't think that anybody suggested, nor would suggest, an overnight universal ban on all firearms.

[KontanKarite]

Originally Posted by JCC

I don't think that anybody suggested, nor would suggest, an overnight universal ban on all firearms.

That's because no one will actually come up with a solution. It's mainly just political rhetoric crossfire here. Plus, I don't agree with KissmeDeadly's first solution because it has an agenda of trying to convince the masses in a half truth ideal that guns are bad, which just isn't true.

A more prudent idea would be to attempt to remove the glamor of guns and make available PSA's on the responsibility of handling a firearm. In fact, I'm surprised that in a nation where guns are permitted, a LOT of people in that nation know next to nothing about them, creating an unrealistic stigma that guns = death and violence.

Then again, what do you expect? The American layman probably aren't aware of all their rights and how to use them.

[Catch]

Oh... Found It!!!

[Angelic Dissonance]

HIM sucks. Cannabalism is awesome. Anarasha, be my freind.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by Entropic

The culture is influenced by laws, which usually dictate how a gun is used.

Ignoring the gun subject, you've got that totally bass ackward. Laws are created by cultures, dictated by cultures. Many laws are simply cultural customs encouraged with the barrel of a gun. (The fact you may be born to a culture of people so uncivilized it makes neanderthals look posh is your problem)

Originally Posted by Angelic Dissonance

HIM sucks. Cannabalism is awesome. Anarasha, be my freind.

Careful, if Anarasha adopts a similar stance on cannibalism we may never see you again.