Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Best avoid Honduras though...

Joey wrote:Or the USA has piss-poor law enforcement. Introduce and enforce a manditory minimum sentance for gun use and you'll see gun crime plumet a few years after.

They completely banned all handguns and civilian firearms and went about confiscating every one they could find, grabbing hundreds more off the street every month. Possession of them was a crime and prosecuted as such, and the police department was pushing that fact HARD for almost a decade.

The crime rate, meanwhile, increased.

Yeah, you have no goddamned clue what you're talking about.

Melissia wrote:They completely banned all handguns and civilian firearms and went about confiscating every one they could find, grabbing hundreds more off the street every month. Possession of them was a crime and prosecuted as such, and the police department was pushing that fact HARD for almost a decade.

The crime rate, meanwhile, increased.

Which only means that there was insufficient enforcement and penalties. Gun control works if you control all of the guns.

biccat wrote:

Melissia wrote:They completely banned all handguns and civilian firearms and went about confiscating every one they could find, grabbing hundreds more off the street every month. Possession of them was a crime and prosecuted as such, and the police department was pushing that fact HARD for almost a decade.

The crime rate, meanwhile, increased.

Which only means that there was insufficient enforcement and penalties. Gun control works if you control all of the guns.

Yeah, that's like saying that communism works if you control all consumption.

Sure, but that's pretty much physically impossible once the population or area size gets large enough...

biccat wrote:

Melissia wrote:They completely banned all handguns and civilian firearms and went about confiscating every one they could find, grabbing hundreds more off the street every month. Possession of them was a crime and prosecuted as such, and the police department was pushing that fact HARD for almost a decade.

The crime rate, meanwhile, increased.

Which only means that there was insufficient enforcement and penalties. Gun control works if you control all of the guns.

Which is, as I said way back on page 1, very likely an impossible proposition in the US at this point.

So let's deal with the reality of the situation. Britain doesn't have a lot of guns, huzzah for Britain. They can have bobbies going about helping old ladies un-tree their cats.

The US has gakloads of guns, boo for the US. As someone living here, and as someone living here who's lived in really bad neighborhoods, I'll take any possible self-defense tools I can get in that environment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joey wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Is there a version of Godwins law for poor use of Freud?

I have grown up and lived my life around people who're ardent Freudians.
I realise this doesn't compare to your AS level in psychology but believe it or not I do know what I'm talking about.

I have grown up and lived my whole life around fighter pilots. Clearly, you can put me in the cockpit of an F/A-18 and I'd know what I was talking about.

Also, aren't you the guy who was pretty certain he could beat a mountain lion in a fistfight? I'm not sure I want to subscribe to your self defense theorems.

Melissia wrote:

biccat wrote:

Melissia wrote:They completely banned all handguns and civilian firearms and went about confiscating every one they could find, grabbing hundreds more off the street every month. Possession of them was a crime and prosecuted as such, and the police department was pushing that fact HARD for almost a decade.

The crime rate, meanwhile, increased.

Which only means that there was insufficient enforcement and penalties. Gun control works if you control all of the guns.

Yeah, that's like saying that communism works if you control all consumption.

Sure, but that's pretty much physically impossible once the population or area size gets large enough...

You're basing your argument on the idea that a certain amount of criminal behavior is acceptable, or will occur regardless of enforcement. If you have good enforcement and regulation and prevent these criminal acts then you can eliminate gun crimes.

d-usa wrote:
3) A stab with a knife is not going to neutralize the intruder.

Sure, if you have a knife that wasn't purpose made, and don't know where to stab the intruder.

Guns are fun. Isn't that it? I love guns, like a normal american.

The reason the crime rates in the US are so high is manly due to the illegal drug trade. Again another form of prohibition and restriction that has failed horribly.

biccat wrote:
You're basing your argument on the idea that a certain amount of criminal behavior is acceptable, or will occur regardless of enforcement. If you have good enforcement and regulation and prevent these criminal acts then you can eliminate gun crimes.

And you're basing your argument on the notion that good enforcement and regulation can entirely do away with gun crimes.

I'm not sure what your evidence for this claim is, though.

biccat wrote:[You're basing your argument on the idea that a certain amount of criminal behavior is acceptable

No I'm not. I'm basing my argument on the idea that having a gun shouldn't be criminal behavior and the incontrovertible fact that banning guns does not have a strong correlation to safety, therefor excessive gun regulation is pointless to begin with.

Seaward wrote:Which is, as I said way back on page 1, very likely an impossible proposition in the US at this point.

Not impossible to do though. An immediate halt on sale of all guns, and an immediate re-registration of all current privately owned guns, significantly harsher punishments on all gun crime (including selling, buying, carrying, usage, etc) and crack down on border control to prevent smuggling.

You could even do a total ban on guns, all registered weapons to be turned over to conversion into paperweights, all seized guns melted down with massive penalties for anyone caught with a gun.

Both physically possible, but political suicide and it would be a long struggle.

Melissia wrote:

Joey wrote:Or the USA has piss-poor law enforcement. Introduce and enforce a manditory minimum sentance for gun use and you'll see gun crime plumet a few years after.

They completely banned all handguns and civilian firearms and went about confiscating every one they could find, grabbing hundreds more off the street every month. Possession of them was a crime and prosecuted as such, and the police department was pushing that fact HARD for almost a decade.

The crime rate, meanwhile, increased.

Yeah, you have no goddamned clue what you're talking about.

If you take away guns, gun crime doesn't happen.
Washington DC Is a single city surrounded by Maryland (no idea what their gun control laws are) and not very far from (IIRC) Pensylvania and Virginia.
Did they also ban guns?

Because all criminals who own guns are going to turn them in for registration...

dogma wrote:And you're basing your argument on the notion that good enforcement and regulation can entirely do away with gun crimes.

It's a good argument for every other type of prohibition, I'm not sure why it would fail here.

SilverMK2 wrote:

Seaward wrote:Which is, as I said way back on page 1, very likely an impossible proposition in the US at this point.

Not impossible to do though. An immediate halt on sale of all guns, and an immediate re-registration of all current privately owned guns, significantly harsher punishments on all gun crime (including selling, buying, carrying, usage, etc) and crack down on border control to prevent smuggling.

You could even do a total ban on guns, all registered weapons to be turned over to conversion into paperweights, all seized guns melted down with massive penalties for anyone caught with a gun.

Both physically possible, but political suicide and it would be a long struggle.

Did you read our constitution?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:

dogma wrote:And you're basing your argument on the notion that good enforcement and regulation can entirely do away with gun crimes.

It's a good argument for every other type of prohibition, I'm not sure why it would fail here.

Worked great when alcohol was illegal, really efficient and reduced crime as well...

biccat wrote:

dogma wrote:And you're basing your argument on the notion that good enforcement and regulation can entirely do away with gun crimes.

It's a good argument for every other type of prohibition, I'm not sure why it would fail here.

1920's say sup.

I'm in favour of the castle doctrine.

Its the reason why the United States has the lowest break in rate in the world

d-usa wrote:

biccat wrote:

dogma wrote:And you're basing your argument on the notion that good enforcement and regulation can entirely do away with gun crimes.

It's a good argument for every other type of prohibition, I'm not sure why it would fail here.

Worked great when alcohol was illegal, really efficient and reduced crime as well...

What is your position on murder prohibition?

Joey wrote:If you take away guns, gun crime doesn't happen.

Why would criminals turn their guns in?

THEY'RE CRIMINALS.

biccat wrote:What is your position on murder prohibition?

My position is that a motivated individual's going to figure out a way to kill someone if he wants to, most of the time.

This thread is best thread for a long time for generating user alerts.

Please confine your remarks to the topic and avoid having a go at other users.

biccat wrote:

dogma wrote:And you're basing your argument on the notion that good enforcement and regulation can entirely do away with gun crimes.

It's a good argument for every other type of prohibition, I'm not sure why it would fail here.

It isn't a good argument for any other type of position, except in the political sphere where rhetorical exaggeration produces support.

Rational examination of such statements, however, ultimately shows that no human behavior can be completely eliminated. They can, however, be minimized given the proper conditions, which is the argument that is really being made when the previously mentioned rhetorical exaggeration is made.

Reported KilKrazy, made me spit coffee on keyboard.

d-usa wrote:Did you read our constitution?

I was just pointing out that it is physically possible, which seemed to be the main stumbling block for people in this discussion.

And to the person saying that criminals don't hand back guns - congratulations, you win the obvious prize But it does make it a lot easier to see who is a criminal... anyone with a gun

Seaward wrote:

biccat wrote:What is your position on murder prohibition?

My position is that a motivated individual's going to figure out a way to kill someone if he wants to, most of the time.

Agree.

For successful prohibition I would also like to point to the War on Drugs, people with multiple DUIs who still manage to get behind the wheels of a car, and felons who are already prohibited from owning weapons who end up shooting people.

d-usa wrote:
Did you read our constitution?

Are you under the impression that words on paper are stronger than political will?

Melissia wrote:

Joey wrote:If you take away guns, gun crime doesn't happen.

Why would criminals turn their guns in?

THEY'RE CRIMINALS.

They don't. Impose a mandatory prison sentance on gun ownership of 5 years.
Whenever some local rude boy gets pulled for a driving offense and he has a gun in the glove box, wham, 5 years inside.
Keep that up for a few years, say a decade to be sure, and crime will be far lower.

thenoobbomb wrote:Criminals in the USA must be heavily armed....
In the Netherlands our Dutch criminals that do break ins arent armed. Maximum some tools or... a knife!
And our East-European criminals are... well. Not armed.

East European criminals are not armed?

Wrong. Very wrong.

dogma wrote:

d-usa wrote:
Did you read our constitution?

Are you under the impression that words on paper are stronger than political will?

Isn't that the point of a constitution? Never seen the point myself.