Fanatics and Cooks Giving the Arts a Bad Name

[OULobo]

Originally posted by 7starmantis
Not quite cowboy....
The concealed handgun law is the same here as it is in all other states.

7sm

Can't be the same. The laws for concealed weapons vary by state. Here in OH there is no justification to carry a concealed weapon unless it is required for your job (ie. armed security, law enforcment, ect.) Regular citizens can't get one at all.

 

[Tapps]

You've dispelled my gunslinger fantasies....

Dude, you live in Detroit !

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by Tapps
Dude, you live in Detroit !

Right...but that only facilitates my gansta drive by shooting fantasies.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by OULobo
Can't be the same. The laws for concealed weapons vary by state. Here in OH there is no justification to carry a concealed weapon unless it is required for your job (ie. armed security, law enforcment, ect.) Regular citizens can't get one at all.

Thats what I thought too...but apparently we're both F-in idiots and the laws are the same for each state....yea, thats it... :rofl:

 

[deadhand31]

The places with the most restrictive gun control have the higher homicide rates. Chicago Mayor Daley has armed bodyguards on him 24/7, yet he won't let anyone else have the same protection he does. Chicago has one of the highest murder rates in the country. Also, it has been found that less than .005% of people holding concealed carry permits abuse them. They are unnaturally law abiding citizens. In other words, if you give a person a driver's license, you're running a greater risk of them commiting vehicular homicide.

I know Britain banned guns, and gun crime there went so bad that they feebly tried to ban replica firearms and air pistols. Crime also went up after gun bans in Australia.

Do criminals get rid of guns? Nope. They keep them. That's why the highest crime areas are those with the most restrictive gun control. The thing that makes a criminal a criminal is that they don't obey laws.

Concealed carry laws do not flood the street with weapons. Only 1% of the population ever really gets a permit. But if you're a criminal, do you really wanna run the risk you'll run in to one? No. Criminals usually check out to see who's weaker, and more defenseless than they are. They never go after someone they feel is equally matched.

 

[SenseiBear]

Originally posted by Technopunk
Oh come on, you are talking about the same Mayor who "Decided" he no longer wanted an Airfield in the city, and, against the courts decisions went out in the middle of the night and tore out the airstrips with bulldozers.

As if he cares.

I remember - My wife (a Chicago native... well, Downers Grove), was pi$$ed as hell about it.

 

[SenseiBear]

Originally posted by 7starmantis
Not quite cowboy....
The concealed handgun law is the same here as it is in all other states.

7sm

Yeah, but if it isn't concealed? Here in WA (not counting regulations that cities may have enacted, and as long as you aren't on State Government property), you can walk the streets with a sidearm strapped on, as long as it is in plain view.

Now, don't try to go in a store, and be prepared to be harrassed, but, still...

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Kempo Guy
And we all know how strict we (the US) are on gun control... Why don't they crack down on the members of NRA???

Katanas don't kill people, Ninjas kill people. Perhaps
Sean

 

[rmcrobertson]

I realize that facts and reason won't do any good here, but--the gun crime rate in England went up because of their ban? In the first place, they've banned handguns for a long time, NOT recently. Most of their cops don't even carry guns.

In the second, please check their homicide rate. Especially their death-by-gun rate. It's about 1/100th of ours. Whoops, I'm wrong. I just checked. In 2001, for the whole British Isles--approximately 60 million people--there were 113 deaths from all forms of assault. This was 1.8 % of the total number of deaths from all, "non-accidental," causes. This includes all deaths by gun, though I did not look far enough into it to find out what percentage of the 1.8 % were caused by assaults with guns.

In the third, the manufacture of cheap guns abroad, and the rise of criminal groups internationally, has meant smuggling more guns into the U.K. This has zip to do with the ban.

Let's see. 113. Multiply by four to get an approximate rate for the US--hm. 452. Uh...was the number of deaths by assault in the US higher, or lower that this?

 

[SenseiBear]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Let's see. 113. Multiply by four to get an approximate rate for the US--hm. 452. Uh...was the number of deaths by assault in the US higher, or lower that this?

Much higher, but I don't think is has to do with the availability of guns... Canada has similar per capita gun ownership as the US, and a "deaths by guns" rate similar to the UK - I believe it has more to do with the culture of fear and violence we have here in the States.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by SenseiBear
Yeah, but if it isn't concealed? Here in WA (not counting regulations that cities may have enacted, and as long as you aren't on State Government property), you can walk the streets with a sidearm strapped on, as long as it is in plain view.

Now, don't try to go in a store, and be prepared to be harrassed, but, still...

Yup. I believe you can in Texas also...but I might be mistaken. In Michigan, if you brandish a weapon, such as a sidearm, you can get in trouble even if it is not concealed. Something called "threat." Not all states have such laws.

But hey....what do I know?

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by SenseiBear
Much higher, but I don't think is has to do with the availability of guns... Canada has similar per capita gun ownership as the US, and a "deaths by guns" rate similar to the UK - I believe it has more to do with the culture of fear and violence we have here in the States.

Bingo! I agree...

 

[Zepp]

Originally posted by deadhand31
The places with the most restrictive gun control have the higher homicide rates. Chicago Mayor Daley has armed bodyguards on him 24/7, yet he won't let anyone else have the same protection he does. Chicago has one of the highest murder rates in the country.

Careful you don't confuse cause and effect here. Do you know for sure that places with higher homicides rates don't need stricter gun control laws? Stricter laws aren't usually enacted in the first place without a reason.

Can you really blame Daley? I don't really want anyone else to be better armed than I am either.

 

[7starmantis]

Originally posted by PAUL
Yup. I believe you can in Texas also...but I might be mistaken. In Michigan, if you brandish a weapon, such as a sidearm, you can get in trouble even if it is not concealed. Something called "threat." Not all states have such laws.

But hey....what do I know?

Actually not much I guess, because in Texas you can be arrested even having a concealed handgun license if the gun become visible by a "reasonable human being" according to Texas state law.

My point was just simply to inform you that in Texas you cannot carry a gun on your side, that was it, sorry if I pissed you off or something, you'll get over it.

7sm

 

[rmcrobertson]

Let me repeat: England, and Japan, have much stricter gun laws than we do. They have a far, far, far smaller rate of deaths by gun and homicide deaths than we do. So in response to the folks who think more gun laws cause more murders...fiddlesticks.

It is ridiculous to think that you will defend youself with a handgun, even at home. For one thing, if there are kids in the house, why do you have the gun out, loaded, and without a trigger lock? If you have the gun safed, unloaded and locked, how will you get the thing out?

Any cop I ever met or heard of will tell you: for home defense, a handgun is worthless. Get a shotgun.

 

[Makalakumu]

I have three guns locked up in my garage and I have three swords on my wall. If a perp walks into my place they are going to find the forth!!! Kidding

Seriously, this country is messed up as far as fear and guns go. I think Michael Moore's film "Bowling for Colombine" sums it up.

 

[OULobo]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Let me repeat: England, and Japan, have much stricter gun laws than we do. They have a far, far, far smaller rate of deaths by gun and homicide deaths than we do. So in response to the folks who think more gun laws cause more murders...fiddlesticks.

It is ridiculous to think that you will defend youself with a handgun, even at home. For one thing, if there are kids in the house, why do you have the gun out, loaded, and without a trigger lock? If you have the gun safed, unloaded and locked, how will you get the thing out?

Any cop I ever met or heard of will tell you: for home defense, a handgun is worthless. Get a shotgun.

I agree with the shotgun comment, but the relation of the stats on gun deaths and gun laws is not a concrete or simple relation, just as the relation of the stats on gun ownership and gun deaths is not a concrete or simple relation. Canada has more gun owners, but less gun deaths. The matter is the mentality of the people holding the guns. My personal opinion is that it is the teaching that is the key. It is alright to have guns open and unlocked around the house. My grandfather raised 6 children around them. He also taught them the proper use, and more importantly, proper respect of the weapon. There will always be criminals and crazies. We cannot predict or truely prevent them from acting, all we can do is hope we can stop them in the act.

 

[Makalakumu]

I agree with the above, except that today, I think that our societal indoctrination in violence circumvents good teaching. My father would have spanked me if I would have pointed a TOY gun at anyone, for instance.

 

[theletch1]

My father would have spanked me if I would have pointed a TOY gun at anyone, for instance.

Hah, that brings back memories. My father used to get on me for the same thing. There were definite times when a toy gun was NOT to be pointed at someone and then there were times when it was acceptable. You were allowed to point it during "war games", or "cowboys and indians" or such but you never pointed the toy at a guest or an adult. Gun safety was paramount in our home. I grew up around them for hunting, killing groundhogs in the field so the tractor wouldn't flip and so on. God forbid you stepped into my mothers house from a hunting trip with a loaded rifle.

As for the handgun/shotgun debate I agree with those who go with the shotgun. My wife is terrified of trying to handle my pistol but she is fairly comfortable with my shotgun. The spread on a shotgun blast is more likely to do the trick for her under pressure than trying to hold a pistol steady enough to put a round anywhere near the target.

 

[Cruentus]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Let me repeat: England, and Japan, have much stricter gun laws than we do. They have a far, far, far smaller rate of deaths by gun and homicide deaths than we do. So in response to the folks who think more gun laws cause more murders...fiddlesticks.

I don't think more gun laws "cause" murders, but I don't think that we have proof that "more" gun laws prevent them either.

I think Canada is a good example of a country with more lenient gun laws then many of our states, but with a much lower crime rate.

What seems to be wrong is our social conscience towards violence rather then not strict enough gun laws.

That's just what it seems like to me, anyways.

btw my opinion on gun laws doesn't lean towards "more strict." I think unless you have a violent crimes on your record, you should be able to own and carry, handgun or or rifle. I think what is more important then stricter gun laws is the ability to identify people. Every gun owner should have to be licensed, and whatever guns they own should be registered under their license, just like a car. When they buy bullets, they are serial #'ed and they have to electronically swipe their license so they have record of what you own. That way, the only way to shoot someone and not get caught is to steal a firearm or obtain one black market; both would be harder to do with better licensing laws.

I think if an enthusiest want to own a small arsenal, its their right as an american to do so. However, its also our right as citizens to identify and try in a court of law the gun enthusiest who decides to cap dat @$$.

Just my opinions...

PAUL