Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not my restrictions BTW, and I am doing no such thing...
Want to have intelligent conversation, start by avoiding falsehoods and ridiculous claims altogether.
To answer your question, I think the honest answer is obvious. The motive is to prevent more gun violence by limiting the ability of those who will commit gun violence. Problem is..., that motive brings a lot of people to apply pressure on government representatives who have a very hard time explaining "sorry, there's nothing we can do" when people keep stuffing in their face the statistics from other countries where levels of gun violence are nowhere near America's.
Government does not have to be the end all be all...
We all can be responsible for our safety and well being and that of others. It's not popular with the anti gun crowd due to their knowledge stemming from holly wood movies and their emotions dictating their logic.
Irrational fear and "what if"...
About your guys protecting the school after the threat...
If only more of these threats were called in before they became headline news, and hopefully we don't need citizens to properly respond to those threats if/when we're lucky enough to get any sort of advance warning. Right?
The reality however is that the implementation of permissive gun laws increases violent crime. Simple as that.
TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said with any facts or references. But I hate it anyway, so I'll just keep repeating my dreams robotically and hope that they somehow become The Truth, as my mentor Herr Goebbels taught me. Maybe somebody will believe me somehow.
The reality however is that the implementation of permissive gun laws increases violent crime. Simple as that. So if there is a good effect from permissive gun laws they do not effect the crime rate. Seems implausible. I would not argue that permissive gun laws don't do some good things. However the bad things that result appear to overcome the good.
Do you have proof of your claim?
There are cultures with permissive gun laws and low rates of violent crime, permissive gun laws and high rates of violent crime. Restrictive gun laws and low rates of violent crime, restrictive gun laws and high rates if violent crime. Seems to me that violent crime rates are entirely independent of gun laws.
About your guys protecting the school after the threat...
If only more of these threats were called in before they became headline news, and hopefully we don't need citizens to properly respond to those threats if/when we're lucky enough to get any sort of advance warning. Right?
One of the most important effects of letting everybody carry a gun if they want to, is deterrence. If all so-called "gun control" laws were eliminated (i.e. if the 2nd amendment were actually obeyed), making it legal for any adult to carry, most of them still wouldn't bother. But a few would. And a criminal who's thinking about robbing someone, or raping or even murdering, would likely think twice knowing that there are probably a few people in the crowd who have a gun and know how to use it. He'd never know which one(s) they are, and so couldn't know who to defend against until too late.
And so he may well decide not to commit his robbery or murder at all. A few truly insane criminals would still go ahead. But a large number of crimes would now never happen in the first place. All without a shot being fired.
Though not perfect, this is a far more effective means of reducing crime than the tired, long-debunked "gun control" still pushed by liberals.
Government does not have to be the end all be all...
We all can be responsible for our safety and well being and that of others. It's not popular with the anti gun crowd due to their knowledge stemming from holly wood movies and their emotions dictating their logic.
Irrational fear and "what if"...
That government be considered "the end all be all" is yet another one of those comments that takes us off the deep end of intelligent discussion. Keep in mind that no matter who we are, we begin from the standpoint of protecting ourselves without help and usually we do when it comes to being victim of crime. The police, friends, others are just not around like you want them to be when someone sneaks up from behind with a gun and wants your wallet...
From there we've got what we can do as individuals and/or collectively to prevent crime. We count on law enforcement for many reasons. One, for example, little old ladies are not as able to "be responsible" or safe as others, without the help of others.
It's the stuff we DON'T see in movies but happening on our streets every day that is born hardly from "irrational fear!"
It's a combination of all things in any case. There is what we can do as individuals, to protect ourselves, family and loved ones, as we all must, and then too there is what we can do collectively, by way of whatever laws that help law enforcement to provide the additional level of security for all concerned, including little old ladies and people just wanting to watch a movie, enjoy a concert, without packing...
The police, friends, others are just not around like you want them to be when someone sneaks up from behind with a gun and wants your wallet...
The thief can always find you in a place where you are alone. He can make sure he's robbing you where no cops are around.
But YOU are around. And if the sneaking guy knows there's a pretty good chance YOU might have a gun and know how to use it, there's a pretty good chance he'll decide not to rob you in the first place.
Voila. A crime prevented, and all without anybody getting hurt, and without a shot being fired.
And the so-called "Gun control" people try hard to NOT put that tactic into place. They'd still rather prevent you from carrying the gun, and take away the thief's fear of consequences for his crime.
There can't be many reasons for the "gun control" people to keep insisting on this. And the reasons they have, are not pleasant.
One of the most important effects of letting everybody carry a gun if they want to, is deterrence. If all so-called "gun control" laws were eliminated (i.e. if the 2nd amendment were actually obeyed), making it legal for any adult to carry, most of them still wouldn't bother. But a few would. And a criminal who's thinking about robbing someone, or raping or even murdering, would likely think twice knowing that there are probably a few people in the crowd who have a gun and know how to use it. He'd never know which one(s) they are, and so couldn't know who to defend against until too late.
And so he may well decide not to commit his robbery or murder at all. A few truly insane criminals would still go ahead. But a large number of crimes would now never happen in the first place. All without a shot being fired.
Though not perfect, this is a far more effective means of reducing crime than the tired, long-debunked "gun control" still pushed by liberals.
Not sure if you've noticed, but I don't really advocate much in the way of gun control. I mostly just pick away at the ridiculous comments, notions and arguments that some gun enthusiasts will make even though I agree we're pretty well screwed when it comes to any real way to address our gun violence problem in America. Can't say some gun control advocates don't also engage in some pretty ridiculous nonsense as well, but mostly I'm just against the nonsense when it comes to issues like this period.
To your belief about "letting everybody carry a gun," the issue I think is that balance between those more like me who don't really view more people carrying a gun as any more deterrence, statistically speaking, compared to gun control, statistically speaking.
I know people in law enforcement families, and of course off-duty police and retired police are all over in plain clothes also carrying a gun. I seriously doubt a criminal thinks any differently about "deterrence" when he already knows an off-duty cop carrying a gun could be anywhere. The thinking or strategy of a criminal isn't going to change much because there may or may not be a civilian also carrying.
Let's face it, criminals don't really want any exchange of gun fire and they're going to do what they can to avoid it altogether, whether there are other guns in the picture or not. Guy wants to shoot you dead for whatever reason, he'll do so, regardless how well you are armed, regardless the law, just as gun enthusiasts love to argue. We all know what harm we can do to anyone if that is our goal, pretty much regardless all precautions we can think to prevent such harm.
That said, what other issues must we face with more people packing rather than less? Do the pros outweigh the cons even if we assume a criminal here or there may think differently because of citizens with guns? That'd be the next question if ALL pros/cons are going to be considered...
TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said with any facts or references. But I hate it anyway, so I'll just keep repeating my dreams robotically and hope that they somehow become The Truth, as my mentor Herr Goebbels taught me. Maybe somebody will believe me somehow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
Do you have proof of your claim?
There are cultures with permissive gun laws and low rates of violent crime, permissive gun laws and high rates of violent crime. Restrictive gun laws and low rates of violent crime, restrictive gun laws and high rates if violent crime. Seems to me that violent crime rates are entirely independent of gun laws.
The thief can always find you in a place where you are alone. He can make sure he's robbing you where no cops are around.
But YOU are around. And if the sneaking guy knows there's a pretty good chance YOU might have a gun and know how to use it, there's a pretty good chance he'll decide not to rob you in the first place.
Voila. A crime prevented, and all without anybody getting hurt, and without a shot being fired.
And the so-called "Gun control" people try hard to NOT put that tactic into place. They'd still rather prevent you from carrying the gun, and take away the thief's fear of consequences for his crime.
There can't be many reasons for the "gun control" people to keep insisting on this. And the reasons they have, are not pleasant.
You sure about all this that gun enthusiasts love to believe...?
Consider for example what armed gang members will do even though they KNOW other gang members they attack have guns and more than willing/able to use them. Does that stop the violence or crimes? Hardly.
Additionally, this thief you are describing is highly unpredictable. Mentally unstable, drugs maybe, be careful assuming too much about what they will do or why, but allowing you that freedom, your thief is not going to know who he is robbing or whether they are carrying. If I were your thief and decided to rob you, I would take your wallet and gun too!
I mean thanks for explaining I can be robbed where I am alone. Really? But this isn't rocket science. Or was that another one of those "you don't know anything" comments? If I happen to notice you are carrying a gun and you are alone, I can perhaps be better able to simply shoot you without witnesses! And shoot you I must because you're carrying a gun and might shoot me back if I don't!
Right?!?
Then too, even if I decide not to mess with you because you're carrying a gun, I simply choose someone who isn't carrying, so crime is not actually deterred. It's simply committed on someone else, the little old lady!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
