You guys and your guns...

[Seth]

Poor Seth. He has made himself a fortress. No-one can get in. Fortunately, no-one can get out either.

But what view from that mountain top.

360 clear field of fire out to 2500 yards...perfect for the .50 BMG.

[Clinton Huxley]

Poor Seth. He has made himself a fortress. No-one can get in. Fortunately, no-one can get out either.

But what view from that mountain top.

360 clear field of fire out to 2500 yards...perfect for the .50 BMG.

Loony

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[mistermack]

It's also absolutely obvious that the more people who carry a gun, the more muggers will carry guns.

If I was a mugger, and a high proportion of people were carrying guns, then I would of course get a gun, before I went mugging. That situation already exists to a degree in America.

Actually, you'll find if you ask criminals, which several researchers have done, you'll find that they are LESS likely to engage in personal crimes like robbery in places where concealed carry is lawful, because their intent is to get the cash, not get shot. This is one of the reasons why, in places where concealed carry is lawful, violent crime rates make substantial drops and stay down.

IF YOU ASK CRIMINALS ?????? WTF ???

It seems that you trust criminals then, to tell the truth at all times.
How fucking dumb can you get? Criminals tell you what you want to hear. Every dumb fucker knows that, but you don't, apparently.

In any case, the time to survey a mugger isn't when they are banged up in jail and off the drugs.
It's when they really really really want some crack. And they haven't got any money. That's when you might find out if they are worried about gun carrying citizens. Yes, they might be worried. Worried enough to get their own gun.

[Seth]

It's also absolutely obvious that the more people who carry a gun, the more muggers will carry guns.

If I was a mugger, and a high proportion of people were carrying guns, then I would of course get a gun, before I went mugging. That situation already exists to a degree in America.

Actually, you'll find if you ask criminals, which several researchers have done, you'll find that they are LESS likely to engage in personal crimes like robbery in places where concealed carry is lawful, because their intent is to get the cash, not get shot. This is one of the reasons why, in places where concealed carry is lawful, violent crime rates make substantial drops and stay down.

IF YOU ASK CRIMINALS ?????? WTF ???

Well, yes, ask criminals. A survey was done of prison inmates on the subject. Who better to ask?

It seems that you trust criminals then, to tell the truth at all times.
How fucking dumb can you get? Criminals tell you what you want to hear. Every dumb fucker knows that, but you don't, apparently.

Since what they told researchers was that they feared armed citizens, how does this support whatever obtuse point you're trying to make?

In any case, the time to survey a mugger isn't when they are banged up in jail and off the drugs.

Sure it is.

It's when they really really really want some crack. And they haven't got any money. That's when you might find out if they are worried about gun carrying citizens. Yes, they might be worried. Worried enough to get their own gun.

Or not.

[Seth]

Poor Seth. He has made himself a fortress. No-one can get in. Fortunately, no-one can get out either.

But what view from that mountain top.

360 clear field of fire out to 2500 yards...perfect for the .50 BMG.

Loony

What do Canadian dollars (and gun policies) have to do with it?

[Seth]

The unemployed are asking to be given government money, so it's reasonable to make sure they aren't going to spend it on drugs.

Gun owners get to own guns because they HAVEN'T broken any laws.

[Tyrannical]

It's also absolutely obvious that the more people who carry a gun, the more muggers will carry guns.

If I was a mugger, and a high proportion of people were carrying guns, then I would of course get a gun, before I went mugging. That situation already exists to a degree in America.

Actually, you'll find if you ask criminals, which several researchers have done, you'll find that they are LESS likely to engage in personal crimes like robbery in places where concealed carry is lawful, because their intent is to get the cash, not get shot. This is one of the reasons why, in places where concealed carry is lawful, violent crime rates make substantial drops and stay down.

IF YOU ASK CRIMINALS ?????? WTF ???

It seems that you trust criminals then, to tell the truth at all times.
How fucking dumb can you get? Criminals tell you what you want to hear. Every dumb fucker knows that, but you don't, apparently.

In any case, the time to survey a mugger isn't when they are banged up in jail and off the drugs.
It's when they really really really want some crack. And they haven't got any money. That's when you might find out if they are worried about gun carrying citizens. Yes, they might be worried. Worried enough to get their own gun.

An armed potential "victim" is a criminals biggest fear. You can always surrender and be arrested by the police, an armed citizen will shoot you dead.

[MrJonno]

This is why burglars in the US very often do NOT carry guns or other weapons. They want the swag, but they don't want to give the homeowner any reason to shoot them. That's also the reason that US burglars generally commit "cold" burglaries, which means they carefully scope out the house to make sure nobody is home before breaking in so they don't get shot dead. On the other hand, in the UK, "hot" burglaries are quite common and burglars will enter occupied homes knowing that the occupants do not have firearms available to them and have been well trained by their government (under penalty of law) to not resist being burglarized lest they be prosecuted for harming the burglar.

Hmm do here the psychopaths going on about hot and cold burglars every so often, would love to see the statistics for any country in the world that keeps such figures . It's not a separate crime to rob a house if someone is in or not so basically its made up lies.

It however it extremely easily to rob any house in the UK and guess what, it isn't because we are unarmed sheeple (that term was created to describe right wing religious gun nuts who follow every word of their local priest) but for the fact that as a typical household with 2 working parents and a minimum of 30 days statutory holiday a year is typically completely empty for 50% of the time. My house certainly is. I certainly do worry about being burgled when I go on holiday (Morocco this year) its typically about a 1 in 10 to 20 chance depending on where you live but that's what insurance is for. I however never for one second even think about someone breaking into my house when I'm actually there. It's far more likely an aircraft landing at the local airport would come through the roof than an burglar coming into an occupied house.

Also even if they did and actually wished me harm they would be at more throat within 5 seconds considering the size of a British house (probably not much bigger than your hummveee) so I would almost certainly still be asleep

Now an automatic laser guided machine gun next in the front and back garden almost certainly would reduce burglaries but could cause problems with the local postman not to mention the neighbors cat

[MrJonno]

Who the fuck are you to say that I shouldn't defend the things that are important to me?

Ahh Libertarian world where your personal actions have no affect on anyone else. Using violence to defend property leads to an escalation of force that endangers everyone. Criminals escalate the use of violence which is what makes them criminals, the difference between non-criminals who do the same absolutely nothing they are criminals

It's why the police don't carry firearms as it would obviously lead to criminals routinely carrying them

[Wumbologist]

the fact that it was done in urban Philly makes it pretty fucking obvious that the people carrying guns were more likely to get shot because they were criminal gang members shooting at each other.

Actually no.

It is a while now, but some months ago, I checked the original Branas paper. He had done a demographic analysis of the shot victims. We know that criminal gangs have certain characteristics. They are normally young, male, poor and uneducated. The Branas study showed the majority of the shot persons carrying guns did not fit this demographic. When the victims are middle aged, or female, or successful in business or career, or have university degrees, they are exceedingly unlikely to be "criminal gang members shooting at each other."

Here's a table with the demographics:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... able/tbl1/

Right off the bat we can see that 53% of case participants had priors, as opposed to less than 40% of the control. They also lived in poorer areas with significantly higher rates of drug trafficking. There's a higher rate of unemployment for the case participants as well, not to mention a significant number of them being reported as working "high-risk" occupations. It looks to me like the study is assuming a cause and effect relationship where the inverse could just as easily be true, this study could amount to "People who are more likely to be shot carry guns" (surprise surprise!) just as well as it could "people who carry guns are more likely to be shot". And it STILL does not make any effort to identify lawful concealed carry holders vs. illegal carry, so on top of a total lack of causality it's still apples to oranges for law-abiding CCW.

[Blind groper]

Who the fuck are you to say that I shouldn't defend the things that are important to me?

Who the fuck are you to declare that your view of the world is superior to mine?

We are people debating an issue. That is who we are.

Who are you?

A hysterical over-responder to civilised dabate?

[colubridae]

It's why the police don't carry firearms as it would obviously lead to criminals routinely carrying them

except police forces in Germany, France, switzerland, italy, spain, poland, ........ etc.

[Seth]

It's why the police don't carry firearms as it would obviously lead to criminals routinely carrying them

except police forces in Germany, France, switzerland, italy, spain, poland, ........ etc.

...and literally EVERY OTHER police force on the face of the earth EXCEPT the UK.

And more and more UK policemen are demanding to be armed precisely because they are facing more armed criminals. The low-rent stop-gap being used at present are "flying squads" of armed officers who can respond, but are always too late if there's a gun involved. Some policemen are being issued handgun, which, stupidly, they carry in a padded case hung from their wrist, rather than in a concealed carry holster.

Buncha idiots, those Brits.

[Blind groper]

To Seth.

First.
New Zealand has the least corrupt government on the planet. That does not come from us being naive sheep. The judgment came from an international survey, so is independent. The US came in 24th on the same survey, showing it is less corrupt than most third world nations, but more so than most advanced nations. Most of the 23 above the USA are countries with tight gun control. This clearly shows that allowing the more insane members of the citizenry to run around with guns does not make for a less corrupt government or nation.

Second
On comparing the rates of violent crime between nations.
Cannot be done. There is no internationally accepted definition of violent crime. This means that the figures for violent crime from one nation cannot be compared to the figures for violent crime of another. Apples and oranges.

For example : In Sweden, a woman who agrees to have sex with a man, but really does not want to, can do him for rape after the event. Basically, if she changes her mind, he becomes a rapist. Obviously this provision raises the number of rape cases. So you cannot compare rape figures in Sweden with rape cases anywhere else. The same thing applies to other violent crimes.

In the same way, Seth, you said that a home owner in the USA, who has an uninvited guest who walks towards him, can shoot that person and it is self defense and legal. Well, the uninvited guest could be a sick diabetic, or person otherwise confused, and you just shot dead an innocent person. In my country, that is murder, but apparently not in the USA.

So please do not tell us that one country has more violent crime than another. You do not know, and neither does anyone else.