| Author | Message | ||
     common sense Citizen Username: Common_sense Post Number: 45 Registered: 12-2004 |
Not so Libertarian. I know Lott is pro gun and I know I am not. What is he going to tell me? I don't need to read Mein Kampf to know that Hitler was wrong and evil - look at the empirical results. Read the paper. One of the big NRA deflectors is to argue anything but the issue, which is that guns kill and lots of guns mean lots of killing. I can't prove the complexity issue nor do I need to. This is what people said. Where do you stand on gun killing in the US - is it right or wrong ? Or is it complex? | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 486 Registered: 3-2004 |
Where do you stand on gun killing in the US i dont stand anywhere on it because a gun never killed anyone. it is an inanimate object just like a toaster or crescent wrench. i am against killing using any tool. killing is wrong. people who kill are wrong. the particular tool that they use is not wrong. it cant be wrong. it is not alive and therefore has no moral or ethical code to adhere to. today someone in the city was killed by a car. do we blame the car? no. today someone got stabbed, do we blame the knife? no. trying to pass the blame onto an inanimate object is a foolish attempt at passing the buck from ourselves and the society we have become. it is a shameless dodge. Not so Libertarian. I know Lott is pro gun and I know I am not. What is he going to tell me? you will never know because you are so sure of yourself that you have closed your mind to what anyone has to say about the issue. saying,"i know his position is different from mine so why bother listening", is the worst form of voluntary ignorance. | ||
| notehead Supporter Username: Notehead Post Number: 2128 Registered: 5-2001  |
Libertarian... nobody, NOBODY, is ascribing moral values to an object. That is simply a dodge, and a waste of time. The point is that reducing the number of guns will reduce the amount of killing. It may not reduce the number of times somebody wants to kill another person, but it will absolutely reduce the number of killings. Isn't that worth a very minor change to the official rights of individuals? Isn't every law (supposedly) a tiny imposition on the rights of individuals or groups, but deemed necessary for the common good? Let's put it another way. There is no cure for the common cold. Do you refuse to take drugs to alleviate the symptoms, or is that some kind of failure or misdirected effort in your opinion? | ||
| common sense Citizen Username: Common_sense Post Number: 49 Registered: 12-2004 |
Libertarian admits that American society has a part that wants to kill - so he wants to make it easier by having guns freely available. There are not many drive by bludgeonings - on grandmothers in Newark were killed by a stray crescdent wrench? DO you actually read what goes on and experience it, or do you close your mind off to that ? PS I read Lotts article in the SL - did you? so I know where he stand - you don't even know what I am talking about, admit it. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 497 Registered: 3-2004  |
Libertarian admits that American society has a part that wants to kill - so he wants to make it easier by having guns freely available. so rather than look at ourselves as a society and see what fosters this need to kill with a gun and do something about it lets just ban guns and forget about it. brilliant. DO you actually read what goes on and experience it, or do you close your mind off to that ? i read alot of what goes on in this world, whether it supports my opinion or not. PS I read Lotts article in the SL - did you? so I know where he stand - you don't even know what I am talking about, admit it. i admit nothing cause you are wrong and just making yourself look foolish. your sarcasm and gotcha attempts are just an attempt to divert us from the fact that you really dont have any facts just opinion and that you are so obstinant that you wont pay any attention to differing opinions if only to bolster your own. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 498 Registered: 3-2004 |
The point is that reducing the number of guns will reduce the amount of killing. aha, the basis of your every point. i would like to see where you got this information. if you can provide empirical proof that reducing the number of guns will reduce the amount of killing then i will happily admit that i am wrong. the truth is there is no such proof. killings might slow down for a while but if someone wants to kill they will find away. our country has a disproportionate amount of murder. i dont blame the gun, i blame the society. we are doing something, i dont know what, that fosters this sort of behavior. i say lets not dodge responsibility by blaming the gun, i say lets look at ourselves as a society and figure out what we are doing wrong. blaming an inanimate object is the biggest dodge. plenty of people own guns and dont kill anyone. so it cant be the guns fault when someone does. it is the person. | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1700 Registered: 1-2003  |
Florida has way more handguns than NJ, its way easier to get a carry permit (basically just ask and take a class), far more scared old people, and still less murder than New Jersey. I don't believe the guns lower the murder rate, but they certainly don't increase it. | ||
| thoughtful Citizen Username: Thoughtful Post Number: 160 Registered: 6-2001 |
According to the FBI's Uniform crime statistics (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03cius.htm), 2/3 of the murders that took place in 2003 involved firearms. It may be impossible to prove, but it seems unlikely that the murder rate would stay the same if we got rid of guns. Also, according to the same statistics, Florida has a higher murder rate than New Jersey. | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1702 Registered: 1-2003 |
Wow, You're right for 2003 (though I know I saw info where FL's murder rate was lower than NJ's but I don't know what year that was). FL had 5.4 murders per 100,000, and NJ with its draconian gun laws had 4.7 per 100,000. New York (whoso population is closer to FL's than Jersey) Had 4.9 per 100,000. These are statistically insignificant numbers. It doesn't seem that the gun laws help that much or relaxing them hurts. | ||
| rssounds Citizen Username: Rssounds Post Number: 341 Registered: 5-2001 |
Actually, a more accurate look at violent crime statistics in Florida would involve pre right to carry and post right to carry laws. This is what Mr. Lott did in his book. I might add that Mr. Lott, in his research for his book, examined FBI and State Police crime statistics for all 3,000 plus counties in the US over a two decade period. His original intent, as an anti-gun advocate, was to prove the opposite of his book title. It was only after he concluded and compiled his research did he change his philosophy regarding gun ownership. | ||
| common sense Citizen Username: Common_sense Post Number: 50 Registered: 12-2004 |
I repeat - the UK has essentially banned gun ownerhsip. It has about one-sixth of the population of the US. It has about one-hundredth of the gun killing rate. I conclude - as does the British Government and people - that the existence of guns facilitates killing. Which is why they are essentially banned. I do think about this topic - I do not see any recognition of these facts by other posters. I do see obfuscation. It is very like a scientific experiment - the UK is the control population without guns, the US is the test population with guns. Observe the results. Conclude. Let's NOT look at the change in killing rates - they only go from totaly uncacceptable to completely unacceptable. Next you will be telling me that Australia's murder rate doubled after they banned guns, omitting to say that it went from one to two. There are no border patrols and searches when you go from Florida to NJ, so comparing one state vs another in an unregulated contigous land mass with free mobility is daft. But it plays into NRA doublespeak to dicuss relative differences in unacceptable klling rates to avoid talking about their very unacceptability. Do you think 5 murders per 100,000 is good somehow? Libertarian - thank you for thinking my idea of banning guns to reduce killing is brilliant. Sometimes the really simple ideas are the best. I don't advocate this as the only cure but we can do that at the same time as working on other changes. These things are not mutually exclusive. Like you I think there are societal norms that need to change so that the US population doesn't resort to mortal violence as a first resort. I think the NRA and others who want us to think that the level of gun violence is somehow normal and acceptabtle and that there is nothing to be done about so why bother, should make a start by changing that stance - you could do that too. You are correct that I have my opinion. I am listening to other opinions - yours for example. I have never heard or read anything that suggests to me that the gun killing in the US is anything other than an obscenity and aberration in what is ostensibly a civilized country. But because it is my opinion I am entitled to it, even if} you don't think I am. Grow up laddie. | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1708 Registered: 1-2003 |
So what is the UK's overall murder rate? Is it significantly higher or lower than the US's? | ||
| common sense Citizen Username: Common_sense Post Number: 52 Registered: 12-2004 |
lower here are some stats KILLING ZONES New York: 571 (down 26 on previous year) Los Angeles: 511 (down 5) Chicago: 447 (down 151) Baltimore: 276 (up 7) Washington: 198 (down 50) St Louis: 114 (up 40) Boston: 62 (up 21) Also down: Philadelphia, Miami and Las Vegas The record: New York’s 2,245 in 1990 New York’s murder rate per person: 6.9 per 100,000, making it it the safest large city in America London’s murder rate per person: 2.4 per 100,000 | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1713 Registered: 1-2003 |
Yeah, I've seen that, but what is the murder rate for the UK, not just London. I remember watching "Cops" in London, and it was hilarious. They responded to a call of a D&D. They get there and this huge drunken nut is screaming, throwing garbage, breaking windows, kicking cars, etc. The cops get out of their car and say "You there! Stop that at once!" And the guy does. Then they say "Get in to the back of our car" and he does. They never touch him. He then proceeds to apologize to the officers for making such a ruckus. When stuff like that happens here, I'll be all for banning guns. | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1714 Registered: 1-2003 |
I also see that Miami's murder rate is down despite guns being easier to get. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 502 Registered: 3-2004 |
I repeat - the UK has essentially banned gun ownerhsip. It has about one-sixth of the population of the US. It has about one-hundredth of the gun killing rate. I conclude - as does the British Government and people - that the existence of guns facilitates killing. Which is why they are essentially banned. maybe it has nothing to do with the amount of guns and all to do with the society. maybe there is something happening in that society that doesnt foster the growth of killers that this country does. also to think about, due to a large increase in crime british police are studying whether to start carrying guns or not. Libertarian - thank you for thinking my idea of banning guns to reduce killing is brilliant. Sometimes the really simple ideas are the best. i do not think "your" idea is a good one and have never backed it. if twisting my words is the only way that you can maintain a position in this debate then i have already won. You are correct that I have my opinion. I am listening to other opinions - yours for example. I have never heard or read anything that suggests to me that the gun killing in the US is anything other than an obscenity and aberration in what is ostensibly a civilized country. But because it is my opinion I am entitled to it, even if you don't think I am. Grow up laddie.} i know you are entitled to your opinion. i think differing opinions are necessary in a democracy. i have never tried to deny you your opinion. again you need to twist my words in order to maintain your place in this debate. i have never said that killing of any kind isnt an obscenity. i just think its idiocy to blame an inanimate object. please come up with some points that do not involve either twisting my words or outright falsehoods in regards to my words and their intent. it seems that with your obvious anger issues and inability to converse without childish misrepresentation of others posts that it is you who needs to grow up, laddie. i will not bother further with your posts in this thread. consider yourself dismissed. | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 949 Registered: 7-2004 |
"i just think its idiocy to blame an inanimate object." In fairness, and not reported in below, the owner said the cat had a murderous look in his eye... Cat Shoots Owner Mar 10, 7:55 AM (ET) BATES TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) - A man cooking in his kitchen was shot after one of his cats knocked his 9mm handgun onto the floor, discharging the weapon, Michigan State Police said. Joseph Stanton, 29, of Bates Township in Iron County, was shot in his lower torso around 6 p.m. Tuesday, the state police post in Iron River reported. He was transported to Iron County Community Hospital. Michelle Sand, a spokeswoman at the Iron River hospital, said Stanton was treated there before being transferred to Marquette General Hospital for further treatment. But Marcie Miller, a representative of the Marquette facility, said there was no record of the hospital receiving a patient by that name. A telephone message seeking comment was left Wednesday at Stanton's home. State police said he was cooking at his stove when the cat knocked the loaded gun off the kitchen counter behind him. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 505 Registered: 3-2004 |
according to the logic used in this thread, cats must be banned! | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1719 Registered: 1-2003 |
Works for me. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 508 Registered: 3-2004 |
crime will drop of those feline fiends are banned! blame the cats! blame the cats! |
