Guns used for lawful self defense Pt. 4

[Seth]

Suppose we ban all hand guns. This will increase crime?

Yes, it will, and does. This is because you do not distinguish "banning" guns, which is a legal act that only law-abiding citizens will obey, from "removing all hand guns from society," which is an impossible and futile task that has never been accomplished by any modern society, ever.

Criminals, it seems, don't obey gun ban laws. They take advantage of gun bans (which their victims obey) to increase their predation and decrease their risks.

Derp!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

At least on Sethworld.

[SteveB]

Anyone see this? Good thing he didn't have a gun and he was in Texas!

At least 14 people were wounded in an apparent mass stabbing at Lone Star College's CyFair campus in Cypress, Texas, on Tuesday. The suspect, armed with what one witness described as an X-Acto knife, was detained.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/ ... 40929.html

And I'm going to Texas in a week.

[Blind groper]

I am not after total gun bans either. I am just after getting firearm ownership limited to those who have a legitimate use for a firearm. That is, rifles and shotguns for meat hunting, or for killing vermin.

The sticking point is the insistence by Seth and Gallstones, and Coito that carrying a hand gun for self defense is a legitimate use. Well, that is a matter of how you define 'legitimate use.' But the statistics (despite bullshit Lott surveys) are clear cut. Owning a hand gun puts family members at more, not less, risk of being shot. A woman has an increased risk 3 fold of being shot dead if there is a hand gun in the house (mostly her male partner doing the shooting), and suicide risk increases 2 to 10 fold depending on how securely the hand gun is stored.

So, to put it bluntly, if you can overcome the "self defense" illogic, you will wake up to the fact that owning a hand gun is an utterly stupid thing, since it does the opposite of risk reduction. It substantially increases the risk of death to members of your family. Doh!!

[Gallstones]

The majority of the voting public, the people who answer the surveys--and apparently sign the petitions--about gun control.

[Gallstones]

I am not after total gun bans either. I am just after getting firearm ownership limited to those who have a legitimate use for a firearm. That is, rifles and shotguns for meat hunting, or for killing vermin.

The sticking point is the insistence by Seth and Gallstones, and Coito that carrying a hand gun for self defense is a legitimate use. Well, that is a matter of how you define 'legitimate use.' But the statistics (despite bullshit Lott surveys) are clear cut. Owning a hand gun puts family members at more, not less, risk of being shot. A woman has an increased risk 3 fold of being shot dead if there is a hand gun in the house (mostly her male partner doing the shooting), and suicide risk increases 2 to 10 fold depending on how securely the hand gun is stored.

So, to put it bluntly, if you can overcome the "self defense" illogic, you will wake up to the fact that owning a hand gun is an utterly stupid thing, since it does the opposite of risk reduction. It substantially increases the risk of death to members of your family. Doh!!

Shove your sticking point up your ass.

No more compromise--every "compromise" is an infringment--no more infringement. We have compromised enough.
No more paring away of our RTKB is acceptable. None, zero.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[Ian]

Jeez Gallstones, you act like there have been too many gun restrictions already. The opposite is true - gun laws have gotten very lax over the last thirty years.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Jeez Gallstones, you act like there have been too many gun restrictions already. The opposite is true - gun laws have gotten very lax over the last thirty years.

Not if you're a raging paranoiac they haven't.

[Gallstones]

The Amendment says .."shall not be infringed." You using a different dictionary from the rest of us?
Anyone who trusts their government to look out for the common people's best interests is a naive, fool and easy fodder for wolves.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The Amendment says .."shall not be infringed." You using a different dictionary from the rest of us?

Your VAR* has some funny dictionaries in it.



*Variable Alternate Reality

[Tero]

Jeez Gallstones, you act like there have been too many gun restrictions already. The opposite is true - gun laws have gotten very lax over the last thirty years.

Put them criminals..who have a record.. back in jail, just for carrying a gun. Give them 10 years.

[JimC]

In the US it is legally valid to apply lethal force via firearm to a physical threat or domicile intrusion.

We know that...

We are arguing that it is a bad law (as do many home-grown Americans), or at least that countries without such absurd laws have considerably less avoidable deaths in comparison...

In what country is it not lawful to use lethal force to respond to a physical threat???? Or, someone forcibly breaking into your home at night? There are maniac countries that tell their citizens that they have to lay their like a slug? Pray tell, which countries are these?

In Britain, Oz and most other similar countries, the self-defence right is applied much more narrowly than it appears to be in the US, particularly with the slew of recent "Castle" laws. You would have to prove that you truly were in serious danger; shooting an unarmed intruder would get you a manslaughter charge at the very least...

All fairly academic, though, because very few householders here will have hand-guns, which is neatly balanced by the fact that very few burglars have them either...

[Blind groper]

This is because you do not distinguish "banning" guns, which is a legal act that only law-abiding citizens will obey, from "removing all hand guns from society," which is an impossible and futile task that has never been accomplished by any modern society, ever.

Except by 23 of the 24 richest nations on the planet. In fact, the only western nation that has never succeeded in removing most hand guns from the population is the USA, and it has failed simply because its politicians do not have guts to even try.

[Coito ergo sum]

Jeez Gallstones, you act like there have been too many gun restrictions already. The opposite is true - gun laws have gotten very lax over the last thirty years.

And homicide rates have gone way down over that same period....