Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[smelltheglove]

how come we never get flow charts in this thread? It seems we need more flow charts.[COLOR="red"]

i prefer pie charts.... mmmm, pie

[Svifnymr]

i prefer pie charts.... mmmm, pie

I'm pretty sure we've had pie charts. I've seen plenty of bar charts also.

[Åmbulance]

I'm pretty sure we've had pie charts. I've seen plenty of bar charts also.

Not gonna lie, i'd prolly care more, if they were boob charts.

[Thephayul]

The IRA was big in Boston too, maybe they're making a comeback and the whole Islam angle is wrong.

Otherwise, I'd say the manhunt/shutdown was more due to the bomb's and potential for more, but not like Boston has a lot of experience with these sorts of things, so the article just seems odd, trying to bring his pet-subject into a current issue.

Agree'd It just reeked of attention getting to me. The "look at me look at me, i have it waaaay worse then you" mentality

[Raidenx]

http://www.captainsjournal.com/2012/...ies-and-brits/

Actually, if the Australian Bureau of Criminology can be believed, Americans would be insane to concern themselves with what non-Americans think about American gun rights.

In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

Moreover, Australia and the United States — where no gun-ban exists — both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America’s rate dropped 31.7 percent.
During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

So, if the USA follows Australia’s lead in banning guns, it should expect a 42 percent increase in violent crime, a higher percentage of murders committed with a gun, and three times more rape.
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations. Twenty-six percent of English citizens — roughly one-quarter of the population — have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized. The United States didn’t even make the “top 10″ list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.

[Deadvolcanoes]

So, if the USA follows Australia’s lead in banning guns, it should expect a 42 percent increase in violent crime, a higher percentage of murders committed with a gun, and three times more rape.

The USA isn't trying to ban guns. They're trying to limit access to criminals.

[Thephayul]

The USA isn't trying to ban guns. They're trying to limit access to criminals.

I'm still trying to process that. Regulations and laws really dont seem like an effective barrier to criminals. They are, after all, criminals

[Deadvolcanoes]

I'm still trying to process that. Regulations and laws really dont seem like an effective barrier to criminals. They are, after all, criminals

Might as well get rid of all regulations and laws, since, you know, criminals don't follow them anyway............

[belfpala]

Might as well get rid of all regulations and laws, since, you know, criminals don't follow them anyway............

I might as well not lock my front door. Criminals will just kick it down anyway....

Yeah.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I'm still trying to process that. Regulations and laws really dont seem like an effective barrier to criminals. They are, after all, criminals

Except that that argument has been being used for the entirety of these last 828 pages and has been debunked, that in countries where it is hard to gain access to illegally sold guns and there are strict gun bans, criminals do not get their hands on guns. Also, plenty of figures have been released that background checks are effective at deterring (note: not COMPLETELY stopping) those who shouldn't have guns from getting them (criminals, mentally ill, illegal immigrants).

I'm really not sure how this isn't getting through to people other than they don't WANT to believe it.

[Thephayul]

Might as well get rid of all regulations and laws, since, you know, criminals don't follow them anyway............

Or we could make sensible laws that accomplish something other then a false sense of security. More laws dont equal less bad guys out there......

[Sam the Wiser]

We all know criminals don't follow the law. If they want to get a gun they will find away. So I guess in the end people trying to ban guns is working for nothing.

[Deadvolcanoes]

I might as well not lock my front door. Criminals will just kick it down anyway....

Yeah.

Hmmmm....let's follow this line of thought for a little bit....A door makes it harder for a criminal to rob your house....so you could say...that a background check is to a gun, what a door is to a house!!!! And if you have a key (not a criminal) you can easily access the house!!! We did it!

---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 02:05 PM ----------

Or we could make sensible laws that accomplish something other then a false sense of security. More laws dont equal less bad guys out there......

Oh so criminals follow sensible laws? Citation required......

[belfpala]

Hmmmm....let's follow this line of thought for a little bit....A door makes it harder for a criminal to rob your house....so you could say...that a background check is to a gun, what a door is to a house!!!! And if you have a key (not a criminal) you can easily access the house!!! We did it![COLOR="red"]

Proof that houses = guns! Amazing!

[Thephayul]

I think the old saying" a lock only keeps an honest man honest" applies here. You guys seem to forget that there are piles of laws a regulations in place already THAT ARE NOT BEING ENFORCED. How in the name god can anyone think that adding to the pile will improve the situation? Adding red tape and more hoops for a legitmate gun owner to jump through isn't going to stop the sandy hook situations.

[Tinykong]

The USA isn't trying to ban guns. They're trying to limit access to criminals.

Enhanced/universal back ground checks will only impact people participating in the system. Sure, that is going to keep criminals from getting guns, either people who don't know they are prohibited, or people who are prohibited and try anyway.

What is the real number of people that is going to stop every year?

[Deleted]

We all know criminals don't follow the law. If they want to get a gun they will find away. So I guess in the end people trying to ban guns is working for nothing.

While we are at it we should get rid of tax laws to, in the end if people want to cheat they will find a way to cheat!

All sarcasm aside some of you people really need to accept that laws do stop some criminals.

[Lilly32]

The USA isn't trying to ban guns. They're trying to limit access to criminals.

Like they do with drugs...oh wait.

[Thephayul]

The USA isn't trying to ban guns. They're trying to limit access to criminals.

The usa isn't but the current administration made no secret of wanting to ban a large number of guns

[belfpala]

You guys seem to forget that there are piles of laws a regulations in place already THAT ARE NOT BEING ENFORCED.

So... you're against expanding background checks, but you want the administration to more aggressively enforce background checks?