|
|
|
| Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 08:07 AM EDT |
as it does with guns.
That's not a "because everyone has guns" scenario, it's a
"because guns + politics + police" are all mishandled. It's a
veritable symphony of incompetence.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 08:45 AM EDT |
| How many of those are legally owned and carried? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: mcinsand on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 09:56 AM EDT |
Some years ago, my British in-laws were here, and one started wagging her finger
at me over dinner with, 'you Americans wouldn't have this violence if you'd go
on and ban all of the guns.' Not more than 5 minutes passed, with a couple of
conversational jumps, and she said, ‘it’s getting terrible in London; you can’t
walk the streets without worrying about being attacked with a knife.’ I
resisted the impulse to say, ‘you Brits wouldn’t have this violence if you’d go
on and ban all of the knives,’ but the disconnect stayed with me. That night, I
looked up international crime statistics, and the likelihood of being a victim
of a violent crime was significantly higher in London than New York city. If I
remember correctly, the violent crime rate per capita in Britain was over twice
that for the US.
I’m not a member of the NRA, and I haven’t been hunting or even target shooting
in well over a decade. Firearms are tools. They can be tools for recreation,
and I have enjoyed the challenge of perforating a soda can. They can also be
tools for violence, but so can a lot of other things. It may have been in the
1990’s that Chicago was having trouble with gang violence despite having some
ultra-restrictive laws against handguns. Gangs were making do, and the local
government was considering requiring registration for baseball bats. People
that want to commit violent acts will find the means, and something in our
western culture seems to lead to a higher fraction of those people.
Britain is a good example of what banning firearms, since it has a limited coast
line. I’m not sure it would even be possible in the US. Even if we could,
though, I think there is plenty of evidence that our issue of violence won’t go
away; the offenders will just find other implements. We do need some serious
examination into just what is going wrong in our culture.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 01:22 PM EDT |
Nuts, or..., on drugs (often the two are associated).
Serotonin is the key problem with most violent acts.
Drugs (illegal and legal), some food additives, even environment itself, can
alter serotonin levels.
We need to plan for a way for society to be better, in order to heal our
problems. And *that* is a big task to get done? So, we need to tackle it in
small bites, and take on one aspect of the problem at a time (I say start with
the drugs and stuff that is injested first).
I have over 15 years of research into the subject of violence, and compulsions
(they can be related). We are not born to be violent at the rates we see in
certain populations. It happens because of what we do, even what we eat or
drink. We all know someone who when drinking alcohol will start a fight 100% of
the time when drinking (this is in part genetic). We all react in different
ways to different stuff in the environment, some chemicals in the environment
can alter some too! It all depends on what chemical, affects who and why?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: archieaa1 on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 03:11 PM EDT |
NYC? I respectfully disagree with you. If you want to see a city where everyone
is armed to the teeth and see the resulting mayhem, My money is on Detroit.
I lived in NYC from 82 to 87. Gun control is a tight as it can be in NYC and
still be in the states and it's well that it should be. The simple truth of
living in the city is you will have a neighbor that will annoy the heck out of
you, if not several. It's an extreme place and the temptations to do something
anti-social as a response to all the pressures of city life are intense. I must
admit that in the summer ( No AC ) it did happen a few times where a piece of
fruit from the basket flew out the window in the direction of the person
shouting or blasting their radio at 3am. Given the number of people living on
top of each other, it's amazing to me that they don't have more murders.
I was raised in Detroit. We lived there till 77 then moved to Ann Arbor.
After I moved back to MI from NYC, I lived in Ann Arbor but, worked in Detroit
for some time. I also have friends that lived in Detroit and some still do. I do
not mean to disparage Detroit. There are many wonderful and encouraging things
happening there. That said, The gun play in Detroit is scary. New years eve in
Detroit sounds like a freaking fire fight and kids those ain't fire crackers we
are hearing. The number of times I heard gun fire in Detroit vs. NYC, It's not
even close. Detroit wins hands down. Remember too, that Detroit is a large city
in terms of land mass. Detroit city covers 143 square miles to 23 for NYC. The
Detroit metro area covers almost 4000 square miles. The population density is
about 5,000 per square mile as compared to just under 71,000 for NYC. Detroit's
homicide rate is 48.3 per 100,000 compared to 6.3 per 100,000 in NYC. I think
that tells the story quite clearly.
In the interest of full disclosure, the figures I quote were taken from
Wikipedia who in turn attribute then to the FBI UCR data. Hopefully the data and
attribution are correct. Call me lazy but, I don't have time to double check
them. Sorry.
Just my 2 cents[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 05:21 PM EDT |
PJ, I must disagree with you. The majority of residents in New York City do not
have guns. NYC has very strict laws regarding the possession of firearms. The
problem in NYC is the number of illegal firearms possessed by criminals whose
crimes are not those of gun possession. The majority of crimes in NYC that have
had guns involved have been done with guns that are not legally possessed per
the NYC laws.
There is ample proof that when the general public is disarmed the rate of
violent crime using guns goes up. Australia is a most outstanding example of
this. The guns that are used come into the country illegally.
Even a "supposed" world wide ban on citizens possessing firearms as
proposed by the U.N. would not work as the ones manufactured for use by the
military and police would find their way into criminal hands.
Another problem with the disarmament of the general public is, at least in the
USA, that the police have no duty to protect people from crime. The police's
duty is to sequester the criminals once a crime is committed. This has been
enshrined by SCOTUS in recent years.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 09:59 PM EDT |
I've come close a couple of times, but have been able to
avoid it so far. ;-)
As far as gun safety, I see little reason in the reactions
here, but quite a bit of hysteria. I assume that of all the
criminals carrying guns in NYC, that very few of them have
been through a official gun safety program. And I assume
that neither have most of the rest of the population.
Iowa has a population of about 3 million. It has over
100,000 concealed weapon permit holders. All of those permit
holders have been through gun safety training, have had a
background check run, and have been fingerprinted. I thought
I had heard that you have to show proficiency with the
weapon at a firing range, but I can't find that anywhere.
In 2009, there were roughly 290,000 deer hunting permits
issued in Iowa. All of those permit holders had to show
proof of hunter safety training.
Besides this, just about every farmer has a shotgun hanging
around, just for the occasional rabid animal, and also to
keep groundhogs away from the building foundations.
There are a LOT of people in Iowa who know what to do with a
firearm in Iowa, and how to do it safely. When hunting, I do
not want to harm anyone with me, despite Dick Cheney's
actions. I'd never get to hunt with anyone again. Word would
get around. If you have that background, and see someone
acting unsafely with a firearm, you tend to make it very
clear that they need to PUT THE GUN DOWN _NOW_. Holding your
own weapon at ready may be advisable, just in case they are
looney tunes. Horsing around with guns is just not tolerated
here. If you are going to point a gun at somebody, you had
better be ready to pull the trigger.
Hearing the word "Gun" and screaming "We're all going to
die!!!!" is not appropriate. That is only appropriate on
Interstate on-ramps behind someone who thinks that the speed
limit is 45. You are then in much more danger of dying that
you are in the presence of a someone with a gun. Unless, of
course, you have restricted gun use to the criminal class.
Then, you should worry.
Shooting someone is also not automatically fatal. It isn't
always like the movies. Besides, who could carry all that
ammunition. IIRC, Charles Whitman used a dolly to cart all
his guns and ammunition up to the University of Texas tower.
My main point, buried in all the anti-gun hysteria, is that
we need to take care of ourselves, that the government can't
be everywhere and be affordable or effective, that we are
the government, and that citizen watchfulness is far more
effective than constant police surveillance. Building
community would be far more effective in NYC than hiring
more police officers.
If the Constitution gives us the right to a citizen militia,
my first priority for deployment would be on the airlines,
with or without guns. People who already have concealed
weapon permits should probably be able to take them on
airplanes. Anybody should be able to defend themselves with
something, even if it isn't a gun. But first, they need
some training, so that this zombie aggressive behavior that
everybody is worrying about doesn't happen. It's all about
training and experience.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 06 2012 @ 09:57 AM EDT |
PJ, New York City has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and
most people there don't have guns - only the ones who ignore the laws do (i.e.
criminals).
If you want to see a place where most people have guns, try Vermont, which,
oddly enough, has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the nation.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
