Gun Control: Should civilians be in possession of guns? [ENDS 09/09/2012]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

If you really believe knife crime and crime in general is on the way down like the government claims then what else can I say.

And if the United States and United Kingdom are full of nutters (most of them are petty criminals as opposed to nutters, so i'd certainly agree we have more petty criminals than Switzerland) then that simply makes the case for gun ownership stronger as a method to deter would-be criminals. The criminals will always commit crime and they'll always get hold of guns and weapons in general - so the question remaining is, do the law abiding majority deserve the right to defend themselves as hinted at in our own constitution?

I say yes, especially for those living in truly dreadful estates that we, being middle class, cannot imagine what life is like there every night and every day.



Not true, look at the Swiss example along with US cities/states which have stronger gun regulations compared with those that do not.

And besides, what right do you have to force your views upon me for my own good? if I want a gun for my own protection and protection of my property, why is that your business or the business of the state anymore than what you get up to inside your bedroom is my business or of the state?

---

Whatever you get up to inside your house is obviously up to you, but you should still follow the law. And it's true that the Swiss have more gun ownership per person than the US and their gun crime is lower than the US, but it's still significantly higher than our own. If you make a graph of gun ownership vs gun crime with population taken into account, Switzerland is the only anomaly, and even if you still include it, there's a positive correlation.

US gun deaths per person is 40 times higher than the UK's. It's something like 0.073 deaths per 100,000 people in the UK, compared to 0.3 deaths per 100,000 people in the US.

Of course, if you want a gun to defend yourself, then perhaps you should just move to a country that allows it, I don't see the UK changing their views any time soon...

I believe that no civilised country (not 3rd world) should be allowed to carry guns. it's disgracefull, yeah self defence but dont you thibk theres other things than guns and knives such as martial arts. It's an accident waiting to happen, them accidents do happen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

Whatever you get up to inside your house is obviously up to you, but you should still follow the law.

---

Since when did something being law make it just?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

And it's true that the Swiss have more gun ownership per person than the US and their gun crime is lower than the US, but it's still significantly higher than our own. If you make a graph of gun ownership vs gun crime with population taken into account, Switzerland is the only anomaly, and even if you still include it, there's a positive correlation.

US gun deaths per person is 40 times higher than the UK's. It's something like 0.073 deaths per 100,000 people in the UK, compared to 0.3 deaths per 100,000 people in the US.

---

Incorrect, even in US cities it can be seen with high gun controls (Chicago) vs barely any controls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CATO

6. Lower murder rates in foreign countries prove that gun control works.

False. This is one of the favorite arguments of gun control proponents, and yet the facts show that there is simply no correlation between gun control laws and murder or suicide rates across a wide spectrum of nations and cultures. In Israel and Switzerland, for example, a license to possess guns is available on demand to every law-abiding adult, and guns are easily obtainable in both nations. Both countries also allow widespread carrying of concealed firearms, and yet, admits Dr. Arthur Kellerman, one of the foremost medical advocates of gun control, Switzerland and Israel "have rates of homicide that are low despite rates of home firearm ownership that are at least as high as those in the United States." A comparison of crime rates within Europe reveals no correlation between access to guns and crime.

The basic premise of the gun control movement, that easy access to guns causes higher crime, is contradicted by the facts, by history and by reason. Let's hope more people are catching on.

---

http://www.cato.org/publications/com...yths-realities

..thus the reason why gun crime is so high is an unintended consquence of gun controls. With gun controls, you may have 10 would-be criminals who will arm themselves, break into a house and out of them 10 incidents it may result in 4 of them ending in death. Without gun controls, of the 10 would be criminals, 6 may be instantly put off even considering breaking into private property and of those 4 incidents that take place, 2 may end in death (but with a twist, the deaths resulting from those incidents would include the criminals as opposed to the innocent occupiers of the property).

Gun control logic is always simple and thus is easily disproven with a little thought (unintended consquences). The chimpish thought of 'ban things which are bad' has always failed throughout history and leads to other problems as well as making the original problem even worse - think of price controls v the free market, public spending vs real demand, the minimum wage v employment stats and so on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

Of course, if you want a gun to defend yourself, then perhaps you should just move to a country that allows it, I don't see the UK changing their views any time soon...

---

Or I could stay here and argue for more freedoms and the right to self defence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santa-my-nana

I believe that no civilised country (not 3rd world) should be allowed to carry guns. it's disgracefull, yeah self defence but dont you thibk theres other things than guns and knives such as martial arts. It's an accident waiting to happen, them accidents do happen

---

It is true that accidents will happen, of course you are correct. Which is exactly why we deserve, as adults, the right to be able to make our own choices and take our own risks - just as you take a risk everytime you may go skiiing, cross the road, take drugs, go on a booze cruise and so on.

Yes but thats different, your pottentially injuring someone else, yeah fine if your injuring yourself but when your putting others in danger thats wrong. Totally wrong

Like it said im in the Uk, I wont be changing my views

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santa-my-nana

Yes but thats different, your pottentially injuring someone else, yeah fine if your injuring yourself but when your putting others in danger thats wrong. Totally wrong

Like it said im in the Uk, I wont be changing my views

---

In regards to injuring others then, how about imposing tough restrictions on who you can have sex with then and how you can have sex? would you agree to that? because remember, sexual activity can harm others in the spread of diseases. I mean we could even include drink in this, as alcohol fuelled brawls and incidents in inner city areas on a friday and saturday night can affect more than just yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Since when did something being law make it just?



Incorrect, even in US cities it can be seen with high gun controls (Chicago) vs barely any controls.



http://www.cato.org/publications/com...yths-realities

..thus the reason why gun crime is so high is an unintended consquence of gun controls. With gun controls, you may have 10 would-be criminals who will arm themselves, break into a house and out of them 10 incidents it may result in 4 of them ending in death.

Without gun controls, of the 10 would be criminals, 6 may be instantly put off even considering breaking into private property and of those 4 incidents that take place, 2 may end in death (but with a twist, the deaths resulting from those incidents would include the criminals as opposed to the innocent occupiers of the property).

Gun control logic is always simple and thus is easily disproven with a little thought (unintended consquences).



Or I could stay here and argue for more freedoms and the right to self defence?



It is true that accidents will happen, of course you are correct. Which is exactly why we deserve, as adults, the right to be able to make our own choices and take our own risks - just as you take a risk everytime you may go skiiing, cross the road, take drugs, go on a booze cruise and so on.

---

As a whole, the US has 40 times more gun deaths than the UK per person. Yes there will be some cities in the US that break the trend, just like they'll be some cities in the UK where gun crime is way more common than others (London, obviously).

As I've said, Switzerland does break the trend, but it's still worse than the UK.

I'd feel a lot safer not having a gun to protect myself than to know that every person in the street has one, especially with the youth of today.

I've made all the points I want in this debate really, I know you'll have many facts to disprove anything else I say :P

Well drink driving is already banned,

Regarding the sex issue they have both consented to do that, whereas the person whos getting injured by a gun didnt consent to getting injured. No they may not have known about adisease possibly but they both consented to it, Guns = bad.

Some Facts
Americans own 200 million firearms
and 35 percent of homes contain at least one gun
a study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found more than 1.7 million children live in homes with loaded and unlocked guns
a study published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine found 39 percent of kids knew where their parent's guns were stored, while 22 percent said they had handled the weapons despite adult's warnings to stay away. What's more, age was not a factor in whether children had played with the guns -- 5-year-olds were just as likely to report doing so as


Some "accidents that have happened" all due to guns

A 3-year-old Southeast Washington boy shot himself in the foot and grazed his hand while playing with his father's gun -- which he found lying on the floor.

The 10-year-old son of a New York City police officer died after shooting himself in the face with his father's loaded revolver. The boy found the weapon on a shelf in the basement while looking for a ball his mom had hidden.

A 2-year-old Tampa boy shot himself in the chest with a loaded 9 mm he found in his parent's couch while playing.

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

I say yes, especially for those living in truly dreadful estates that we, being middle class, cannot imagine what life is like there every night and every day.

---

Isn't that just suggesting we let them shoot each other out, like a contained self-destructing problem? Arming those who live in these estates would probably be robbed of their guns and weaponry and have them used against them. Afterall, lots of robberies could hypothetically result in a person being attacked by their own bread knives.

Undertaker why do you keep banging on about self defence? Would you not say a gun is just a LITTLE extreme? Buy a can of pepper spray for god sake...

Definitely not. Guns only cause gun crime. Guns along with any other weapons only make people think they need one to protect themselves from others. If people don't have the weapons in the first place then surely the problem is gone. But on the other hand it's a lot easier for people to get hold of other weapons like knives, so the problem doesn't really go away. I still say no to people being allowed guns though.