Guns used for lawful self defense Pt. 4

[JimC]

To amplify the point about criminals getting hand guns, criminals come in many levels. There are a small number of hard, professional hit-men in any country, who will usually be able to get a hand gun when they want it. BG's point (which I totally agree with) is that restrictive gun laws, and a low level of guns in general circulation, mean that low-level crooks, and teenage wannabees (like the arseholes who shot the baby) will not usually be able to obtain guns in countries like NZ and Oz. They may well do damage, but casual murder by an easily available hand-gun is a rare event, unlike the US today...

[Seth]

It's unlawful for anyone engaged in commerce in firearms to sell a handgun (or a rifle or shotgun or any other firearm) without holding a Federal Firearms License and completing a NICS background check on EVERY transaction.

Totally incorrect.

http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaign ... ophole-faq

I quote :

"Unlicensed sellers are people who may sell a small or large amount of guns but do not (or are not supposed to) earn their livelihood from firearm sales. These sellers do not have to conduct criminal background checks on gun sales. Unlicensed sellers may sell guns at gun shows, out of their homes, or even over the Internet."

Nope. They are "occasional sellers" selling firearms from their personal collections, they are not engaged in the business of selling firearms so they are not engaged in commerce according to federal definitions. All commercial sellers of firearms (ie: for profit or as a living or trade) must have an FFL. Read more carefully next time rather than cherry-picking. And no person may sell a firearm to the resident of another state without going through a licensed FFL dealer, thus "even over the internet" is at best duplicitous and misleading. Yes, an individual may put up an ad to sell a gun to another individual on "the internet" (or in a newspaper) but cannot lawfully transfer the firearm directly without the Form 4473 and the NICS check to anyone who is not a resident of his own state. That sort of transfer is controlled by the states. Some states have such requirements, some do not.

But as I said, anyone selling firearms in commerce must be licensed.

So can anyone in the UK, or NZ, or anywhere else on the planet, if they choose to do so illegally.

Sometimes this becomes possible, but not often.

Horseshit. It's possible everywhere with relative ease if you're a criminal.

Most of the time, a criminal who wants a hand gun in my country has to do without. Ditto Australia, UK etc. Even illegal hand guns are few and far between in NZ. We get very, very few hand gun murders. Most firearms murders are with rifles or shotguns, which are available legally to those with a licence. In the USA, the situation is very different, with hand guns far more readily available, and a ridiculously high level of hand gun homicide.

The reasons are as much cultural and demographic as they are due to a lack of firearms availability.

since there's is absolutely no way to keep criminals from obtaining firearms if they really wish to do so...even where you live.

23 out of the 24 richest nations has shown that is is very possible to prevent the vast bulk of hand gun sales to criminals, by making hand guns illegal for everyone except the police. Hand gun murders in all those 23 nations are extremely rare. Only in the USA are hand gun murders common.

Cherry picking.

Gun bans don't eliminate gun crime or reduce violent crime.

No, but they reduce gun crime dramatically and reduce gun murder dramatically.

Evasive obfuscatory pettifoggery.

You are correct in that such bans do not reduce violent crime. But a violent crime with no gun is much less likely to result in death or permanent disability.

But since any criminal that wants to kill someone need only use a knife, club or other weapon, your argument is so much bum custard.

On self defense.
The vast bulk of threats are able to be countered with non lethal methods.

So say you. But even if true the important ones are the ones that cannot be so countered.

I have been twice threatened as an adult. I talked my way out both times. A gun was not needed, or wanted.

Idiots never think they need a gun until they do, and then it's too late and we rename them "corpses."

If you need more than the 'gift of the gab' to extricate yourself, then there are various non lethal self defense systems available, including acoustic alarms that generate such a piercing noise that no person can hang around, pepper sprays, and even tasers. All work very well, and all are normally non lethal.

Hm. I believe tasers, pepper spray and suchlike are ILLEGAL in NZ. I know they are in the UK. As for "piercing noise" that's just so much hogwash. They don't work. Just watch an episode of "Whale Wars" to see the evidence of that fact.

A hand gun is unnecessary and more likely to result in the death of the wielder or a member of his/her family. Bearing in mind the statistics, that show clearly increased mortality among family members where a hand gun is owned by one of them, simply owning a hand gun is the mark of an idiot.

Hoary old gun-banner lie.

[Blind groper]

But as I said, anyone selling firearms in commerce must be licensed.

That was not the point in dispute. You seem to have glossed over that part.

My original point was that second hand guns sales do not require police checks etc., and therefore there is no legal mechanism to prevent insane or criminal Americans buying guns. This is true. As a result of this point, and the widespread availability of guns in the USA, any criminal or nutter who wants a gun will get a gun, and a hand gun at that. Result is 8,000 hand gun homicides per year.

In my country, hand guns are very tightly controlled, and hand gun homicides are so few that many years there are none at all. That is the difference. It is absolutely false that a criminal who wants a hand gun in NZ can get one with relative ease. It is extremely difficult, and the vast bulk of criminals do not own a hand gun.

Cherry picking.

Evasive obfuscatory pettifoggery.

Hoary old gun-banner lie.

Interesting, Seth, how when you have no answer, you place an accusation of lies or similar. Unless you can support such accusations with data, the statement is so much garbage.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"...so much garbage."

[orpheus]

Most of the time, a criminal who wants a hand gun in my country has to do without. Ditto Australia, UK etc. Even illegal hand guns are few and far between in NZ. We get very, very few hand gun murders. Most firearms murders are with rifles or shotguns, which are available legally to those with a licence. In the USA, the situation is very different, with hand guns far more readily available, and a ridiculously high level of hand gun homicide.

The reasons are as much cultural and demographic as they are due to a lack of firearms availability.

[FBM]

To amplify the point about criminals getting hand guns, criminals come in many levels. There are a small number of hard, professional hit-men in any country, who will usually be able to get a hand gun when they want it. BG's point (which I totally agree with) is that restrictive gun laws, and a low level of guns in general circulation, mean that low-level crooks, and teenage wannabees (like the arseholes who shot the baby) will not usually be able to obtain guns in countries like NZ and Oz. They may well do damage, but casual murder by an easily available hand-gun is a rare event, unlike the US today...

Not rare enough, that's a fact.

[JimC]

To amplify the point about criminals getting hand guns, criminals come in many levels. There are a small number of hard, professional hit-men in any country, who will usually be able to get a hand gun when they want it. BG's point (which I totally agree with) is that restrictive gun laws, and a low level of guns in general circulation, mean that low-level crooks, and teenage wannabees (like the arseholes who shot the baby) will not usually be able to obtain guns in countries like NZ and Oz. They may well do damage, but casual murder by an easily available hand-gun is a rare event, unlike the US today...

Not rare enough, that's a fact.

Yes. Put the non US, 1st world examples into the "extremely rare" category, and the US into "not uncommon"

(I do love my double negatives...)

[FBM]

To amplify the point about criminals getting hand guns, criminals come in many levels. There are a small number of hard, professional hit-men in any country, who will usually be able to get a hand gun when they want it. BG's point (which I totally agree with) is that restrictive gun laws, and a low level of guns in general circulation, mean that low-level crooks, and teenage wannabees (like the arseholes who shot the baby) will not usually be able to obtain guns in countries like NZ and Oz. They may well do damage, but casual murder by an easily available hand-gun is a rare event, unlike the US today...

Not rare enough, that's a fact.

Yes. Put the non US, 1st world examples into the "extremely rare" category, and the US into "not uncommon"

(I do love my double negatives...)

I don't not agree. I think.

[Jason]

Most of the time, a criminal who wants a hand gun in my country has to do without. Ditto Australia, UK etc. Even illegal hand guns are few and far between in NZ. We get very, very few hand gun murders. Most firearms murders are with rifles or shotguns, which are available legally to those with a licence. In the USA, the situation is very different, with hand guns far more readily available, and a ridiculously high level of hand gun homicide.

The reasons are as much cultural and demographic as they are due to a lack of firearms availability.

Clearly Groper is arguing that the availability of handguns accounts for the disproportionally high (compared to New Zealand) numbers of homicides in the United States of America. The reason New Zealand has a much lower homicide rate per capita is that their people are kept from the corrupting influence of handguns. To make this point clearer, if one were to take the tiny nation of New Zealand and make handguns as available as they are in the United States of America one would see an sharp incline of homicides on that little island until it was on par or exceeded that of the United States of America. Put simply: the only thing keeping the peace-loving peoples of New Zealand from becoming raving homicidal maniacs is that their government has wisely kept handguns out of their hands.

Rational. Logical. Indisputable.

[JimC]

Faku wrote:

...Put simply: the only thing keeping the peace-loving peoples of New Zealand from becoming raving homicidal maniacs is that their government has wisely kept handguns out of their hands....

If you knew Kiwis, you'd know that this isn't an ironically hypothetical point, but a stone cold fact!

They are all maniacs, and god knows what they'd be like with guns!

[Blind groper]

Fair comment, Jim.

You only have to see us on the rugby field, and you will realise that we are all homicidal maniacs. Give us hand guns, and it would be hell on Earth!

[orpheus]

Most of the time, a criminal who wants a hand gun in my country has to do without. Ditto Australia, UK etc. Even illegal hand guns are few and far between in NZ. We get very, very few hand gun murders. Most firearms murders are with rifles or shotguns, which are available legally to those with a licence. In the USA, the situation is very different, with hand guns far more readily available, and a ridiculously high level of hand gun homicide.

The reasons are as much cultural and demographic as they are due to a lack of firearms availability.

Clearly Groper is arguing that the availability of handguns accounts for the disproportionally high (compared to New Zealand) numbers of homicides in the United States of America. The reason New Zealand has a much lower homicide rate per capita is that their people are kept from the corrupting influence of handguns. To make this point clearer, if one were to take the tiny nation of New Zealand and make handguns as available as they are in the United States of America one would see an sharp incline of homicides on that little island until it was on par or exceeded that of the United States of America. Put simply: the only thing keeping the peace-loving peoples of New Zealand from becoming raving homicidal maniacs is that their government has wisely kept handguns out of their hands.

Rational. Logical. Indisputable.

(bold mine)

Actually, he argued that it influences the number of handgun murders; not homicides in general. So, yes, it is rational.

[Blind groper]

Thanks Orpheus. You nailed it.

[Jason]

Yes. Congratulations. You've made... a non-point?

This is why I don't argue with Groper, or you for that matter. Idiots.

[Blind groper]

Faku

If you find a problem with data, or rational thinking, in my posts, I am happy to hear from you.
When your comments, like that in the previous post, tell me nothing, then you are posting crap.