Utah official state firearm

[Svartalf]

Gall, isn't violence tied to population concentrations and large cities?
Guns are no cause, they are just tools that are a bit too convenient.

[maiforpeace]

Mai if there are weapons in the house you have to know where they are at all times.
You have children don't you?

No children. I would expect a gun to be under lock and key if there were any children around.

[sandinista]

Gall, isn't violence tied to population concentrations and large cities?
Guns are no cause, they are just tools that are a bit too convenient.

more so violence is tied to poverty and draconian drug laws.

[.Morticia.]

Gall, isn't violence tied to population concentrations and large cities?
Guns are no cause, they are just tools that are a bit too convenient.

more so violence is tied to poverty and draconian drug laws.

I don;t think so.

Violence is a tool and people have to be of the mindset that violence is a valid way to solve their problems.

And a gun is only one such tool of violence ( or protection ).

We have to remember that the genocide of Rwanda was enacted using machettes.

[Wumbologist]

Guns are no cause, they are just tools that are a bit too convenient.

Tools which are also very useful (even more so, in trained hands) for defending against violence.

[Gallstones]

Gall, isn't violence tied to population concentrations and large cities?
Guns are no cause, they are just tools that are a bit too convenient.

Convenient for the lazy and stupid. There are better tools for controlling people and getting what one wants--behavior, like charm and commerce and intimidation.

Violence in the US is misunderstood and misrepresented. True it clusters in certain areas, and true those tend to be densely populated areas. But population density alone can't fully explain it. The causes are complex, far more complex than the knee jerk demand that private gun ownership be forbidden or severely restricted can address. Criminals don't register and they don't buy from licensed dealers. That would not change despite law abiding citizens doing those very things--as most of them already do.

[Wumbologist]

That's a pity because I would be interested. For the record, this is an ongoing debate at my home...my husband is pro gun, I am not. When he goes away, he insists I have the Glock at my ready to defend myself against intruders. I refuse and hide it after he leaves. The last time this happened I forgot where I hid it, you can imagine what an ordeal that was.

Similar situation with us here. I'm very pro-gun, carry all the time. She doesn't care for guns, doesn't want to shoot them, etc. But she respects my opinions on them, and has no issue with me owning and carrying. I understand your husband's desire to give you a means of protection when he's not around, but I don't think it's wise to leave a gun in the hands of someone who isn't well-versed in the rules of firearm safety and hasn't trained with one. Either he needs to lock it up when he's not around, or you need to at least take basic firearm safety classes so that you understand what you're dealing with. Anything in between is not a good situation.

[FBM]

Maybe it was a bit of a historical accident that gunpowder and firearm technology was developing in Europe about the same time North America was being invaded. Anyway, firearms helped the European invaders succeed and became an integral part of NA culture, which continued to develop firearm technology further in response to environmental challenges. NA culture is just European culture adapted to a different environment.

[Warren Dew]

That's a pity because I would be interested. For the record, this is an ongoing debate at my home...my husband is pro gun, I am not. When he goes away, he insists I have the Glock at my ready to defend myself against intruders. I refuse and hide it after he leaves. The last time this happened I forgot where I hid it, you can imagine what an ordeal that was.

I'd note that arguments against gun control are not necessarily arguments in favor of any individual's having guns. I'm strongly against gun control, but I don't currently own any guns, for example.

In the last huge gun control thread that I remember, on another forum, and that Gallstones contributed to, I remember the following data being brought up:

- In the U.S., stricter gun control laws are highly correlated with higher crime rates. This is the statistic that's commonly cited by those who argue that guns reduce crime.

- However, when adjusted for population density, the correlation mostly disappears. This suggests that gun control doesn't affect the crime rate, but high crime rates do cause gun control laws to be passed even though they don't work.

- Gun crimes in the U.S. are higher than in the UK. Legal availability of guns apparently makes it more likely that criminals will use guns rather than other weapons.

- However, the overall violent crime rate is higher in the UK, to the extent the statistics can be compared. Now we're back to guns having a deterrent effect that may reduce overall crime.

[Clinton Huxley]

Apparently Arizon pondering making the Colt something or other their state firearm.
Lovely, lovely guns. Mmmm...guns!

Be nice to see the little kiddies at school, colouring in pictures of their state firearm.

[FBM]

Crime and Self-Defense




* Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11]



* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]



* Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[16]



* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]



* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]



* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]



* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]



� 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"



� 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"



� 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Amazing how well facts, statistics, research and the like work, if you bother to look at them.

[Geoff]

Perhaps the fact that the US is a relatively new country is a factor?

We used to have a law in England that all men had to practise the longbow every day...

[Feck]

I'm glad I live in a country that doesn't have as much gun culture . I'm glad the chances of me ever facing a criminal with a gun are so low . I 'm all in favour of sensible guncontrol BUT in the US it seems that since there are so many guns out there and so many are in the hands of criminals already gun control would only disarm honest citizens .

I think that homicide being the second most likely cause of death for young people is a damning statistic .

I think it's wrong to assume that guns reducing overall crime is such a wonderful thing property crime may be higher but is that comparable ?

Is the use of lethal force moral unless threatened with lethal force ? do householders have a gun to hand because they are likely to be confronted by an armed adversary ,is that adversary likely to be armed because householders have guns . Is an arms race a good idea for a civilian population ?

[PsychoSerenity]

I agree with Feck.

But the main reason I'm posting here is to say, every time I've seen this thread I've read it as 'firealarm'.





Carry on.

[Wumbologist]

I think that homicide being the second most likely cause of death for young people is a damning statistic .

A statistic that needs to be taken in context. The "young people" that are likely to be killed in the US are not innocent baby-faced children, they're members of violent inner city gangs. A serious problem, to be sure, but not the same problem one might first guess when looking at the statistics.