Guns?
#106
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by anotherlimey
No way sonny jimbo. It's an illusion. Car alarms (unless they're very good) won't stop your car getting stolen. House alarms won't stop your house being burgled. A gun won't stop you being killed by a mugger/home intruder or what ever else.
From this page: http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm
However that's an anti-gun site.
From this page: http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm
However that's an anti-gun site.
I didnt say thay would stop it happenening, however they will lower the risk, otherwise the alarm manufacturers have made an awful lot of cash out of lies. Statistics can say anything, which is why I dont believe them from any side of the argument.
Look, you do what you think is neccessary and I shall do what I think is neccesary and within the law.
Why dont you all come back to me when you have truly been in amongst dangerous criminals and seen what they can do. When you've dealt with someone who is willing to rape and then murder the victim to stop them talking. When you've had to wade into a room full of idiots waving smashed bottles in each others faces.
#107
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by anotherlimey
Here's a surprising fact:
#108
Originally Posted by sibsie
...though I always wear a bright orange reflective saddle cloth and helmet when I go riding in the woods during the season.
You do well to dress in blaze orange, especially if your state allows rifles (many only allow shotguns with deer slugs, or muzzle loaders/black powder. Damn rifles can carry miles....not that the orange would help much at that distance.
#109
Lost in BE Cyberspace










Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,596











Originally Posted by ImHere
I didnt say thay would stop it happenening, however they will lower the risk, otherwise the alarm manufacturers have made an awful lot of cash out of lies. Statistics can say anything, which is why I dont believe them from any side of the argument.
Look, you do what you think is neccessary and I shall do what I think is neccesary and within the law.
Why dont you all come back to me when you have truly been in amongst dangerous criminals and seen what they can do. When you've dealt with someone who is willing to rape and then murder the victim to stop them talking. When you've had to wade into a room full of idiots waving smashed bottles in each others faces.
Look, you do what you think is neccessary and I shall do what I think is neccesary and within the law.
Why dont you all come back to me when you have truly been in amongst dangerous criminals and seen what they can do. When you've dealt with someone who is willing to rape and then murder the victim to stop them talking. When you've had to wade into a room full of idiots waving smashed bottles in each others faces.
I've got nothing against owning a weapon, I just find it laughable when people think they are any safer with one. Security should be layered, ask yourself how someone would get into your house, or how they would get into your car.
#110
Originally Posted by Dant3
I agree up to the last point. How do they make it easier for criminals?
#111
Lost in BE Cyberspace










Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,596











Why don't I call a home insurance company and see if they'll give me a discount on insurance if I have a gun in the house?
That would prove if your house is any less likely to be burgled because you have a gun.
That would prove if your house is any less likely to be burgled because you have a gun.
#112
Originally Posted by ironporer
You do well to dress in blaze orange, especially if your state allows rifles (many only allow shotguns with deer slugs, or muzzle loaders/black powder. Damn rifles can carry miles....not that the orange would help much at that distance.
#113
Lost in BE Cyberspace










Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,596











Here's an interesting paper on gun ownership:
http://www.bettermanagement.com/libr...ibraryid=12325
So owning a gun actually increases the risk of dying, lets hope they push up those premiums.
http://www.bettermanagement.com/libr...ibraryid=12325
He does see potential opportunities, however, in the area of how insurance companies can better price, and perhaps more equitably distribute the cost of, the risks associated with guns. "There is some evidence," Lemaire says, "including evidence from the Penn School of Medicine, that just owning a gun significantly increases your chance of dying -- even when you control for variables like neighborhood, education, and so on."
#114
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by anotherlimey
I've got nothing against owning a weapon, I just find it laughable when people think they are any safer with one. Security should be layered, ask yourself how someone would get into your house, or how they would get into your car.
Also yes I am ex military, and ex police, so I do understand fully the element of surprise and I am no super hero. If some one came up behind me and quitely suggested I hand over my money or else, they may get my wallet. If some small time punk who hasnt a clue what they are doing tries to threaten me they wouldnt. If someone broke into my house in the middle of the night they would definitely not get the chance to rape and murder my wife and child without serious risk of pain and death to themselves.
#115
Just Joined
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 4

Read some of the work by John R lott, Dan B Kates or Gary Kleck.
Don't think that the RKBA is an American idea. First laid down on paper in the UK in the Magna Carta. Included in the British 1689 Declaration and Bill of Rights, which still exists in UK Constitutional Law. See how this compares to the American BoR written almost 100 years later. Self Defense was a legitimate reason to own a firearm in the UK until 1956. The first firearms laws introduced in the UK were designed by the ruling classes as they fear a popular/socialist revolution
Sucessive gun laws in the UK have disarmed the people whilst armed crime has gone through the roof.
Have a look at the crime rates of those states that have liberal gun ownership with those where the gun laws are restrictive. Even the anti-gun have the result of "net benefit". The criminal does not knbow who is armed.
Don't think that the RKBA is an American idea. First laid down on paper in the UK in the Magna Carta. Included in the British 1689 Declaration and Bill of Rights, which still exists in UK Constitutional Law. See how this compares to the American BoR written almost 100 years later. Self Defense was a legitimate reason to own a firearm in the UK until 1956. The first firearms laws introduced in the UK were designed by the ruling classes as they fear a popular/socialist revolution
Sucessive gun laws in the UK have disarmed the people whilst armed crime has gone through the roof.
Have a look at the crime rates of those states that have liberal gun ownership with those where the gun laws are restrictive. Even the anti-gun have the result of "net benefit". The criminal does not knbow who is armed.
#116
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by anotherlimey
Here's an interesting paper on gun ownership:
http://www.bettermanagement.com/libr...ibraryid=12325
So owning a gun actually increases the risk of dying, lets hope they push up those premiums.
http://www.bettermanagement.com/libr...ibraryid=12325
So owning a gun actually increases the risk of dying, lets hope they push up those premiums.
"To put things in an epidemiological context, Lemaire points out that "among all fatal injuries, only motor vehicle accidents have a stronger effect [than firearm deaths].""
So ban those dangerous cars too.
And if everyone is so concerned withh each others health why do we still have cigarettes? They kill plenty more people than guns do.
#117
Lost in BE Cyberspace










Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,596











Originally Posted by ImHere
"To put things in an epidemiological context, Lemaire points out that "among all fatal injuries, only motor vehicle accidents have a stronger effect [than firearm deaths].""
So ban those dangerous cars too.
And if everyone is so concerned withh each others health why do we still have cigarettes? They kill plenty more people than guns do.
So ban those dangerous cars too.
And if everyone is so concerned withh each others health why do we still have cigarettes? They kill plenty more people than guns do.
The car argument is redundant, they are dual use. You can't take your kids to school in a gun.
Better driving tests would help!
#118
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Simon G
Read some of the work by John R lott, Dan B Kates or Gary Kleck.
Don't think that the RKBA is an American idea. First laid down on paper in the UK in the Magna Carta. Included in the British 1689 Declaration and Bill of Rights, which still exists in UK Constitutional Law. See how this compares to the American BoR written almost 100 years later. Self Defense was a legitimate reason to own a firearm in the UK until 1956. The first firearms laws introduced in the UK were designed by the ruling classes as they fear a popular/socialist revolution
Sucessive gun laws in the UK have disarmed the people whilst armed crime has gone through the roof.
Have a look at the crime rates of those states that have liberal gun ownership with those where the gun laws are restrictive. Even the anti-gun have the result of "net benefit". The criminal does not knbow who is armed.
Don't think that the RKBA is an American idea. First laid down on paper in the UK in the Magna Carta. Included in the British 1689 Declaration and Bill of Rights, which still exists in UK Constitutional Law. See how this compares to the American BoR written almost 100 years later. Self Defense was a legitimate reason to own a firearm in the UK until 1956. The first firearms laws introduced in the UK were designed by the ruling classes as they fear a popular/socialist revolution
Sucessive gun laws in the UK have disarmed the people whilst armed crime has gone through the roof.
Have a look at the crime rates of those states that have liberal gun ownership with those where the gun laws are restrictive. Even the anti-gun have the result of "net benefit". The criminal does not knbow who is armed.
Sadly you are flogging a dead horse. People prefer to live in naievety.
Its well know the best way to create a police state is by
A) Disarming the populace, then
B) Create a paranioa amongst the public that crime is out of control and finally
C) Introduce "Tough New laws" designed to reduce the now soaring crime rates.
I wonder if the Jews in Nazi Germany would have been so easily rounded up and massacred if gun ownership had been commonplace amonsgt them.
#119
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by anotherlimey
Here's an interesting paper on gun ownership:
http://www.bettermanagement.com/libr...ibraryid=12325
So owning a gun actually increases the risk of dying, lets hope they push up those premiums.
http://www.bettermanagement.com/libr...ibraryid=12325
So owning a gun actually increases the risk of dying, lets hope they push up those premiums.
And finally, here some other information regarding gun ownership. This time though its from Switzerland....
http://diodon349.com/Attack_on_America/swiss_guns.htm
"In 1939, just before Hitler launched World War II, Switzerland hosted the International Shooting Championships. Swiss president Philipp Etter told the audience, which included representatives from Nazi Germany:
There is probably no other country which, like Switzerland, gives the soldier his weapon to keep in the home.... With this rifle, he is able every hour, if the country calls, to defend his hearth, his home, his family, his birthplace.... The Swiss does not part with his rifle.
Switzerland won the service-rifle team championship. The lesson was not lost on the Nazi observers. ....
...To this day, every male, when he turns 20, is issued a full automatic military rifle and required to keep it at home. Universal service in the Militia Army is required. When a Swiss is no longer required to serve, he may keep his rifle (converted from automatic to semi-automatic) or his pistol (if he served as an officer)."
This is still true today. Almost every home in Switzerland has a firearm at home. Many are service rifles required by law to be kept at home and ready. Switzerland has amongst the lowest gun death rates in the world.
Last edited by ImHere; Jun 9th 2005 at 9:31 am.
#120
Lost in BE Cyberspace










Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,596











Originally Posted by ImHere
Sadly you are flogging a dead horse. People prefer to live in naievety.
Its well know the best way to create a police state is by
A) Disarming the populace, then
B) Create a paranioa amongst the public that crime is out of control and finally
C) Introduce "Tough New laws" designed to reduce the now soaring crime rates.
I wonder if the Jews in Nazi Germany would have been so easily rounded up and massacred if gun ownership had been commonplace amonsgt them.
Its well know the best way to create a police state is by
A) Disarming the populace, then
B) Create a paranioa amongst the public that crime is out of control and finally
C) Introduce "Tough New laws" designed to reduce the now soaring crime rates.
I wonder if the Jews in Nazi Germany would have been so easily rounded up and massacred if gun ownership had been commonplace amonsgt them.
You think you don't live in a police state? Open your eyes.




