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.

Joey wrote:Crime rates in the UK are pretty misleading. If you remove the statistics from less than half a dozen inner city areas in London especially, also Birmingham and Manchester, then the per capita crime figures are tiny.
To take my own county as a microcosm, if you removed the crime figures from say Chaddeston and Sinfin from the crime figures of all 1,000 square miles of Derbyshire, crime would be virtually non-existant.
Outside of inner city areas like that, crime is very, very low. Most places in the UK are very safe areas to live.
I had assumed it was the same in the USA, that outside of crime-ridden ghettos, in the sub-urbs, it was actually pretty safe.
But apparently people on here seem to be so scared of a home invasion that their only option is to arm themselves.

Yes and if I selectively removed the areas of high crime in ANY PLACE IN THE WORLD, then I could make a case for it being crime free. You know without the warlords Mogadishu is a peaceful Utopia. This particular thread of argument is ill-conceived.

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:Crime rates in the UK are pretty misleading. If you remove the statistics from less than half a dozen inner city areas in London especially, also Birmingham and Manchester, then the per capita crime figures are tiny.
To take my own county as a microcosm, if you removed the crime figures from say Chaddeston and Sinfin from the crime figures of all 1,000 square miles of Derbyshire, crime would be virtually non-existant.
Outside of inner city areas like that, crime is very, very low. Most places in the UK are very safe areas to live.
I had assumed it was the same in the USA, that outside of crime-ridden ghettos, in the sub-urbs, it was actually pretty safe.
But apparently people on here seem to be so scared of a home invasion that their only option is to arm themselves.

Yes and if I selectively removed the areas of high crime in ANY PLACE IN THE WORLD, then I could make a case for it being crime free. You know without the warlords Mogadishu is a peaceful Utopia. This particular thread of argument is ill-conceived.

If crime in the US is limitted to certain areas, why do people who do NOT live in those areas fear crime so much that they have a gun?

Without guns there would be nothing to stop the gangs invading the suburbs.

I'm surprised the UK has such a higher rate of rape than the USA since it's only a few weeks since we had a thread discussing the reasons why the USA had so much higher a rate of rape than the UK.

Joey wrote:But apparently people on here seem to be so scared of a home invasion that their only option is to arm themselves.

incorrect. WE're incredibly armed in case we're invaded by British food.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Without guns there would be nothing to stop the gangs invading the suburbs.

I'm surprised the UK has such a higher rate of rape than the USA since it's only a few weeks since we had a thread discussing the reasons why the USA had so much higher a rate of rape than the UK.

Your criminals got patriotic and decided to be #1?

British food is too bland to invade anyone.

Kilkrazy wrote:Without guns there would be nothing to stop the gangs invading the suburbs.

I'm surprised the UK has such a higher rate of rape than the USA since it's only a few weeks since we had a thread discussing the reasons why the USA had so much higher a rate of rape than the UK.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

I am a little skeptical about this site now, I already don't like the fact that it doesn't use per capita statistics in addition to the ones provided, but then look at the drug offenses line.

corpsesarefun wrote:British food is too bland to invade anyone.

True, but we can't take that risk now can we.

corpsesarefun wrote:British food is too bland to invade anyone.

Really? I've had some spectacularly exciting sandwiches.

but we can't take that risk now can we.

I will go put that SCAR on my credit card immediately.

SOFDC wrote:

but we can't take that risk now can we.

I will go put that SCAR on my credit card immediately.

Uggg, I can FEEL the bolt group moving in it and it bothers me, like an overgrown Auto-5. Or undergrown...whatever.

AustonT wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Without guns there would be nothing to stop the gangs invading the suburbs.

I'm surprised the UK has such a higher rate of rape than the USA since it's only a few weeks since we had a thread discussing the reasons why the USA had so much higher a rate of rape than the UK.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

I am a little skeptical about this site now, I already don't like the fact that it doesn't use per capita statistics in addition to the ones provided, but then look at the drug offenses line.

That drug statistic alone makes me doubt those figures. It was my understanding that during the Bush years police were keen to arrest lots of small scale cannabis users, police in Britain are pretty lenient. You have to be caught with it 3 times in order to be registered on the system (and let off anyway).
Also the car offenses. America is six times the size of Britain, there's no way that's accurate.

Uggg, I can FEEL the bolt group moving in it and it bothers me, like an overgrown Auto-5. Or undergrown...whatever.

My first centerfire rifles were a pair of AKs, one in 5.45 and one in 7.62. I do not mind that feel. Only thing that's really bothered me about the SCAR-Ls i've put my hands on was the...."Nerf gun plastic that was made just ever slightly TOO thin" feel. Everything else I thought was workable or good.

...Well, and I am paranoid about the charging handle smacking me in the knuckles.

Joey wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Without guns there would be nothing to stop the gangs invading the suburbs.

I'm surprised the UK has such a higher rate of rape than the USA since it's only a few weeks since we had a thread discussing the reasons why the USA had so much higher a rate of rape than the UK.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

I am a little skeptical about this site now, I already don't like the fact that it doesn't use per capita statistics in addition to the ones provided, but then look at the drug offenses line.

That drug statistic alone makes me doubt those figures. It was my understanding that during the Bush years police were keen to arrest lots of small scale cannabis users, police in Britain are pretty lenient. You have to be caught with it 3 times in order to be registered on the system (and let off anyway).
Also the car offenses. America is six times the size of Britain, there's no way that's accurate.

It's a perfectly believable number considering at 1/6 the size of the US, Britain also has HALF the crime.
If you can find a better comparison I'd love to see it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SOFDC wrote:

Uggg, I can FEEL the bolt group moving in it and it bothers me, like an overgrown Auto-5. Or undergrown...whatever.

My first centerfire rifles were a pair of AKs, one in 5.45 and one in 7.62. I do not mind that feel. Only thing that's really bothered me about the SCAR-Ls i've put my hands on was the...."Nerf gun plastic that was made just ever slightly TOO thin" feel. Everything else I thought was workable or good.

...Well, and I am paranoid about the charging handle smacking me in the knuckles.

I'm not a fan of the Mattel feel, but I try not to let myself be swayed by that. What bothers me is that I can feel ( or at least I think I can) the cycle of operation completely. The only comparison I could make was between a Beretta 391 and an Auto 5. One simply cycles smoothly without any observed feel and the auto 5 I can feel the bolt move through the receiver as it clunks back and forth. I still think I'm not articulating what I feel correctly but I hope you get the gist, it just feels awkward in a way I don't even get from AK types.

Joey wrote:If crime in the US is limitted to certain areas, why do people who do NOT live in those areas fear crime so much that they have a gun?

If you love your family, why don't you have one?

Your question was loaded. And also stupid. Which means it is stupid^2, because loaded questions themselves are stupid.

Melissia wrote:

Joey wrote:If crime in the US is limitted to certain areas, why do people who do NOT live in those areas fear crime so much that they have a gun?

If you love your family, why don't you have one?

Because why would I need one? I can't envisage a situation where I'd need one, short of foreign invasion.

Melissia wrote:
Your question was loaded. And also stupid. Which means it is stupid^2, because loaded questions themselves are stupid.

What?
You say you need a gun to defend yourself against crime, yet in all liklihood the area that you live in has very little crime, so why the precaution?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AustonT wrote:
It's a perfectly believable number considering at 1/6 the size of the US, Britain also has HALF the crime.
If you can find a better comparison I'd love to see it.

sure

Joey wrote:Because why would I need one?

Because you love your family. Don't you love your family enough to buy a gun, just in case something happens?

Joey wrote:What?

Your question was loaded with the presumption that peopel are "scared" "afraid", "full of fear", etc. Just like the question above.

And therefor was stupid and not worthy of anything but scorn. Which I heap upon your question in large quantities.

Melissia wrote:

Joey wrote:Because why would I need one?

Because you love your family. Don't you love your family enough to buy a gun, just in case something happens?

The chance of me being found with a gun and sent to jail (mandatory minimum sentance) is far greater than the liklihood of-
being burgled
AND
being aware of being burgled
AND
being in a state to do something(not drunk or otherwise incapacited)
AND
the burglers not immediately fleeing (which nearly all of them will do anyway)
AND
the burgler having a weapon
AND
the burgler being physically larger than me (this is very unlikely)

So, that's why.
What is "loaded" about "If you live in a low-crime area, why would you need a gun to protect yourself from crime?"

Ah, so your answer is that you don't love your family enough.

You should really pay attention to what is actually said rather than your gut emotional response, you know. You're practically trolling by sneering at people who have guns claiming they're afraid of everything, and your loaded questions are illogical and frankly not worthy of consideration-- which is why I'm giving you the exact same thing right now, to give you an idea of how you're acting.

Connecticut is one of the safest places in the US but gak still happens to good people like this horrible story. Granted its a 1 in a million chance of happening, its still a good idea to be prepared. Having a gun is like having a fire extinguisher, its just a good idea.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/petit_family/index.html

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:Connecticut is one of the safest places in the US but gak still happens to good people like this horrible story. Granted its a 1 in a million chance of happening, its still a good idea to be prepared.

The chance of that happening is one in a million.
The chance of someone having a heart attack around you is pretty high. I assume you also know CPR.
Do you also know how to rescue someone who's drowning?
I could go on.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Ah, so your answer is that you don't love your family enough.

You should really pay attention to what is actually said rather than your gut emotional response, you know. You're practically trolling by sneering at people who have guns claiming they're afraid of everything, and your loaded questions are illogical and frankly not worthy of consideration-- which is why I'm giving you the exact same thing right now, to give you an idea of how you're acting.

...what?
Okay then maybe I'm seriously misunderstood. Why do so many people have guns, then?

AustonT wrote:

Joey wrote:

AustonT wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Without guns there would be nothing to stop the gangs invading the suburbs.

I'm surprised the UK has such a higher rate of rape than the USA since it's only a few weeks since we had a thread discussing the reasons why the USA had so much higher a rate of rape than the UK.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

I am a little skeptical about this site now, I already don't like the fact that it doesn't use per capita statistics in addition to the ones provided, but then look at the drug offenses line.

That drug statistic alone makes me doubt those figures. It was my understanding that during the Bush years police were keen to arrest lots of small scale cannabis users, police in Britain are pretty lenient. You have to be caught with it 3 times in order to be registered on the system (and let off anyway).
Also the car offenses. America is six times the size of Britain, there's no way that's accurate.

It's a perfectly believable number considering at 1/6 the size of the US, Britain also has HALF the crime.
If you can find a better comparison I'd love to see it.

The UK is 1/40th the size of the US with 1/6 the population.

Yes and Yes. People in American are more self sufficient and don't count on the government to always be there.

Joey wrote:

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:Connecticut is one of the safest places in the US but gak still happens to good people like this horrible story. Granted its a 1 in a million chance of happening, its still a good idea to be prepared.

The chance of that happening is one in a million.
The chance of someone having a heart attack around you is pretty high. I assume you also know CPR.
Do you also know how to rescue someone who's drowning?
I could go on.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Ah, so your answer is that you don't love your family enough.

You should really pay attention to what is actually said rather than your gut emotional response, you know. You're practically trolling by sneering at people who have guns claiming they're afraid of everything, and your loaded questions are illogical and frankly not worthy of consideration-- which is why I'm giving you the exact same thing right now, to give you an idea of how you're acting.

...what?
Okay then maybe I'm seriously misunderstood. Why do so many people have guns, then?

Im 16 and i know how to do those things.


Because some people find them fun. And other people aren't capable of defending themselves without one. and/or feel safer with a tool that would be an equalizer should the gak hit the fan.

Because we wish to be prepared.

Associating preparedness with fear is utterly nonsensical.

You don't have to be paralyzed with fear over your house catching on fire to realize that it's a good idea to have a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your house. You don't have to be afraid of heights to realize that guard railings on stairs and elevated walkways are good ideas. You don't have to be afraid of snakes to realize a snake infestation in your house is bad news, causing you to nip the problem in the bud. You don't have to be aquaphobic to buy flood insurance. Nor do you have to be agoraphobic to want a roof over your head.

And you don't have to be afraid of anything to buy a gun and be prepared for a bad situation that might happen, however unlikely.

Your insinuation of fear is stupid and insulting, and frankly just makes you nothing more than a worthless troll as long as you insist upon it.

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:Yes and Yes. People in American are more self sufficient and don't count on the government to always be there.

America has a long history of giving people the freedom to oppress each other.
You say potatoes, I say potatoes.

Joey wrote:The chance of that happening is one in a million.
The chance of someone having a heart attack around you is pretty high. I assume you also know CPR.
Do you also know how to rescue someone who's drowning?
I could go on.

I do in fact know CPR.

I know how to rescue someone who's drowning, yes.

I'll admit to not knowing how to punch out a puma in a cage match, but please do go on. You seem to be making an argument that people should be prepared for the unexpected, and I'm in full agreement with that. It's why I carry. And know those other things.

Melissia wrote:Because we wish to be prepared.
Associating preparedness with fear is utterly nonsensical.
You don't have to be paralyzed with fear over your house catching on fire to realize that it's a good idea to have a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your house.

True.

Melissia wrote:
You don't have to be afraid of heights to realize that guard railings on stairs and elevated walkways are good ideas.

You do if you live in an area that doesn't have many heights

Melissia wrote:
You don't have to be afraid of snakes to realize a snake infestation in your house is bad news, causing you to nip the problem in the bud.

You do if you live in an area with few snakes

Melissia wrote:
You don't have to be aquaphobic to buy flood insurance.

You do if you live in a dry area.

Melissia wrote:
Nor do you have to be agoraphobic to want a roof over your head.

What?

Melissia wrote:
And you don't have to be afraid of anything to buy a gun and be prepared for a bad situation that might happen.

You do because the chance of it happening AND the gun being a determining variable is statistically insignificant, therefore it is irrational.

Joey wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Joey wrote:If crime in the US is limitted to certain areas, why do people who do NOT live in those areas fear crime so much that they have a gun?

If you love your family, why don't you have one?

Because why would I need one? I can't envisage a situation where I'd need one, short of foreign invasion.

Melissia wrote:
Your question was loaded. And also stupid. Which means it is stupid^2, because loaded questions themselves are stupid.

What?
You say you need a gun to defend yourself against crime, yet in all liklihood the area that you live in has very little crime, so why the precaution?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AustonT wrote:
It's a perfectly believable number considering at 1/6 the size of the US, Britain also has HALF the crime.
If you can find a better comparison I'd love to see it.

sure

As it turns out homicide is not the only violent crime...and this is not a comparison it's a wiki article.

Joey wrote:

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:Connecticut is one of the safest places in the US but gak still happens to good people like this horrible story. Granted its a 1 in a million chance of happening, its still a good idea to be prepared.

The chance of that happening is one in a million.
The chance of someone having a heart attack around you is pretty high. I assume you also know CPR.
Do you also know how to rescue someone who's drowning?
I could go on.

Do you not know CPR? I learned it in class in 5th grade.
Do you not know how to save someone who's drowning (by the way, it's get them out of the water)?

Furthermore, I'm not in constant fear of getting a flat tire, but I've got spare in my trunk.
I'm not in constant fear of something catching on fire in my house, but I've got a fire extinguisher.

Let me just paraphrase Joey and all his future responses:

"I think guns are bad and I am right. Everybody who thinks they need to own a gun is wrong, crazy, and/or irrational. If I repeat this often enough it will be true."