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.

The psychology is that by threatening the criminal's security by carrying a gun yourself, you increase his propensity to violence.

I haven't researched statistics on this as regards the USA and guns, however it is shown by UK statistics that people who carry knives for self defence are more likely to get into knife fights and be injured as a result.

My wife cannot stop a man who ways 210 intent to do her or the kids harm. With the 2nd Amendment she can.

You'll have to show me the overall murder/battery/rape rate in England is substantially lower than the US to support the statement. then you have to factor in the joy of open borders.

Frazzled wrote:My wife cannot stop a man who ways 210 intent to do her or the kids harm. With the 2nd Amendment she can.

True. But also the would be attacker is more likely to be armed/ready in the first place. And, due to derangement, more committed to the act.


...That said : I wouldn't want to threaten a Texan lady or her kids..just in case I wasn't more committed.

And, just in case, obviously I wish no harm to you and your good lady and brood. I think you wouldn't take it as such but i wouldn't want to cause a drama. ESPECIALLY ON THE INTERNET !

No stats to hand, and it's late and Friday night so I ain't digging frankly, but from what I recall the USA is a peculiarly violent one for your soci economic status.

I of course blame the parents.

No offense boyo except for the parents thing as I are one!

Remember all those times your parents embarrassed you? Yes, the meant it! TEE HEE!
Yes this photo of you as a baby can and will be used against you at any event, with any new friend, any new date, or anywhere, anytime muahahahaha

@Killkrazy: It's like I alluded to earlier. It's really not a good idea to pull a knife for anything other than a last resort. That's just simple street smarts. It can just create escalation and doesn't make you that dangerous in the first place. Someone without a knife can still fairly easily overpower you.

The thing is, a gun just makes you more dangerous. It doesn't prevent escalation and doesn't mean an attacker won't still attack you. A gun has a decent chance of deterring an unarmed attacker. But if they have a gun too, pulling yours basically just means you've put all your chips on *outshooting* your attacker. So the knife rule still applies. If an attacker displays a gun, your best bet is probably not to draw it for anything other than a last resort.

When you break it down like that, it's probably legitimate to question how often a gun is actually useful as a crime deterrent.

I think it is an issue where Americans and Europeans will never really understand each other's point of view.

Nonetheless it is an excellent debate and everyone has made cogent and sincere contributions.

I call for a round of mutual backslapping.

Frazzled wrote:No offense boyo except for the parents thing as I are one!

Remember all those times your parents embarrassed you? Yes, the meant it! TEE HEE!
Yes this photo of you as a baby can and will be used against you at any event, with any new friend, any new date, or anywhere, anytime muahahahaha

I'm as happy and easy-going as I am because over the last two decades I have hunted down and destroyed every photograph of me under the age of 18. Ah, the air would taste so sweet if it weren't for my Nurgliness...

Excellent move. Unfortunately for the boy we have lots of pictures of him at his long haired self absorbed best. Oh years of entertainment lie ahead!

Frazzled wrote:My wife cannot stop a man who ways 210 intent to do her or the kids harm. With the 2nd Amendment she can.

Actually she can if trained in Martial arts or some other form of self defense.

A gun won't necessarily save her unless she is trained in its use. A gun is a tool, without any training she would be relying on fear and/or luck. Many people have died because they bought into the myth of the gun.

But martial arts won't stop a gun. Criminals need control, violent crime gives control, and the easiest way to secure it is through the advantage of a gun. If you don't have one yourself, you are intentionally gimping yourself against someone with one.

Many people have gotten hurt or killed believing that martial arts will save them from firepower. History has dramatically proven this time and time again. I shouldn't have to point out where.

Rioting is a national sport in europe now?
Huh. We must be lagging behind. Ireland is very, very safe, and we have gun control.
That said, you can still get guns, but it's a bit harder than in the US, and most people aren't interested in them.
We do have the lovely phenomenon of syringe crime though, which shows that scumbags will find a way no matter what.

I hope this isn't taken as a cheap shot, it's certainly not intended that way, but in America in 2005, 154 children lost their lives due to unintentional firearms incidents. Is that acceptable?

Greebynog wrote:I hope this isn't taken as a cheap shot, it's certainly not intended that way, but in America in 2005, 154 children lost their lives due to unintentional firearms incidents. Is that acceptable?

To me yes it is, and this is just my opinion, because in the overall picture they were either terminated by the universe for some reason, or replaced by a larger amount of newborns shortly after their departure. I think it was Railguns that pointed out earlier that guns are tools. They (firearms) are (usually) not discharged by themselves. It is unfortunate that the parents of those children did not take the time and responsibility to properly teach their children about the proper use and handling of a firearm. That is the reality of the situation here. In addition, I have this opinion even though my cousin was one of those statistics about 4 years ago.

A certain level of accidents is inevitable, just as with cars.

I wonder how/if the number of automobiles in use in any given year
correlates to the number of sold or registered firearms in any given year.

Too lazy to do my own research, though.

While 154 children lost to firearms is bad, the fault would lie with the adult(s) in the area with the firearm. If you are trained in the use of firearms (wife was a cop and me a military type) you know how to effectively store your weapon and ammunition.

A trained individual "should" never have a loaded gun readily available when children are around. When you get your concealed to carry permit you get that training. I our case the SIG is stored in a lock box with a trigger guard on it. The .270 is in a locked case, the 12-gauge is in a locked case.

Also, in our family youngsters are taught gun safety at an early age. It helps to keep the "coolness" factor down and the urge to play with someting "forbidden". My oldest boy is 6 and he started hunting at the age of 4.

About the martial arts idea...I've got training and so does my wife and I can tell you that while it's nice to have some ability it's not going to completely "save" your butt in a fight. Close quarters combat is down and dirty and nothing is fancy about it at all. Most times if someone wants to get in your face they are going to throwdown but it's their buddy you have to watch out for. That rotten bastich might have a gun or a knife and be willing to use it when your not expecting it.

Here in Las Vegas there are plenty of folks who get shot but some punk who brings a gun to a martial arts/knife fight.

But The Warriors proves that the knife guy wins. Right?

Only if he's really lucky or the guy with the gun shoots it like all the "gangbanger" movies.

I prefer the "double-tap" protection option. But me I'm damn near a pacifist compared to the wife. Never ever mess with a South Texas girl with a gun.

She told me that when she was a cop that she could shoot-to-kill to protect herself (she's 5'2") if a suspect made a "threatening" move towards her. She personally added her caveat to that of "if he's at least 6'0"" If not then she was going to beat his ass with her ASP baton.

She's feisty!

This idea of protection comes up a lot in the gun debate.

One reason why Europeans don't hanker for guns like Americans, is that basically we feel safe in our society, on the streets, and in terms of being coerced by our governments.

I believe the crime and murder statistics show that the USA is a much more violent society than the UK. I can understand why Americans feel they need guns.

Ace_of_Spades wrote: she was going to beat his ass with her ASP baton.

She's feisty!

Raw-ow-r?

If guns are outlawed then the only people with guns will be people with criminal intent, and the people who had guns for self defence won't have them to protect themselves anymore.

That argument takes no notice of the fact that many countries (the UK, Japan, most Euro countries) have quite strict gun laws and do not have a big problem with gun crime. Criminals in these countries can get hold of guns and mainly use them to settle arguments between themselves. British police aren't even armed, except for special units.

Kilkrazy wrote:That argument takes no notice of the fact that many countries (the UK, Japan, most Euro countries) have quite strict gun laws and do not have a big problem with gun crime. Criminals in these countries can get hold of guns and mainly use them to settle arguments between themselves. British police aren't even armed, except for special units.

It also doesn't take note of the massive population differences or the massive cultural differences. Japan's suicide rate is enourmous when compared to the UK, US, and most Euro companies. Why can't they be more like the rest of us?

Railguns wrote:But martial arts won't stop a gun. Criminals need control, violent crime gives control, and the easiest way to secure it is through the advantage of a gun. If you don't have one yourself, you are intentionally gimping yourself against someone with one.

Many people have gotten hurt or killed believing that martial arts will save them from firepower. History has dramatically proven this time and time again. I shouldn't have to point out where.

Exactly. I took martial arts for ten years. Did all the velociraptor young punk stuff. Do I think I can take a 210 man at my age barehanded? Maybe if I know he's coming. Maybe not. With pistol my wife can. She's been trained to and knows whats at stake. Otherwise, she's defenseless. As the old saying goes, a Kentucky Rifle makes every man six feet tall.

God created man. Samuel Colt made them equal.

VermGho5t wrote:
To me yes it is, and this is just my opinion, because in the overall picture they were either terminated by the universe for some reason, or replaced by a larger amount of newborns shortly after their departure.

Bit like abortion then yes ?

Ah, this thread again. As a person who takes no issue with personal gun ownership I think I'll weigh in on this from a slightly different perspective.

It is fairly problematic to pin violent crime in the US on gun ownership. A gun is a tool. It facilitates the cause of of harm to another being. There is nothing intrinsically evil about the gun itself. Indeed, there are plenty of ways in which harm can be done to another person without the use of a gun. I'm sure that virtually everyone who is a member of this forum has, at least once, considered which everyday objects could be easily weaponized. If not, I recommend you do, it is quite illuminating. Once we realize that there are literally hundreds of ways to kill one another at our fingertips the question of gun use becomes one of motive, not possession. What motivates a person to use a gun?

I believe that, generally, there are two broad categories of gun related criminal actions: retributive and profit driven. Retributive crimes are ones of passion; the result of people driven to acts of violence as a result of perceived injury. Such crimes are virtually impossible to do away with. They are simply an extension of human nature. Profit driven crime, on the other hand, is something born of necessity; of the perception that legitimate means of change are beyond reasonable action. These crimes can be prevented, but not through gun control. Rather, social and structural reforms are the proper vehicle. Things like the disassociation of education from property taxes (or property tax pooling), enhanced public transit, and improved unemployment services.

In any case, I think that arms control is largely a dead issue in the US. There are simply too many privately held weapons, and too high a demand for the legitimate purchase of more, for any real political push to restrict ownership. Moreover, focussing on gun ownership as a cause of violence serves to ensconce real social issues in a nigh unto impenetrable maze of partisan rhetoric.

malfred wrote:

Ace_of_Spades wrote: she was going to beat his ass with her ASP baton.

She's feisty!

Raw-ow-r?

Sorry, what does this mean? Should I have said "butt" or "glutieus maximus".

About the level of violence in the UK and Japan...I'm from TX but I spent 8 years in the UK (4.5 living north of London) and 8 years in Japan (Mom's from Okinawa)...so let me weigh in on both. Growing up I didn't see a lot of violence in either country (but the Japanese have some ultra violent anime) unless you add "soccer violence" since I played in both countries. But when I got older and was stationed back in each country I saw my fair share of violence.

Sorry to say this to all the British Bros on board but I saw a ton more violence in the UK. For awhile we (mil types) were banned from most of the pubs/clubs around the base because of fights with locals. At the time there was a problem with "Yanks" getting jumped by local guys who were angry with them for talking/dancing/dating some of those beautiful British women. Unfortunately most Yanks don't go party by themselves. So the fights were never little affairs.

So you'd end up with Yanks and the girls we would meet and the pissed of local suitor and his mates throwing down. It got so bad that the nearest pubs/clubs we could go to where almost 15 miles away from base.

This was a regular occurance and we could never figure out why. We were under orders not to fight and most of us didn't go lookng for fights since we knew the book would be thrown at us. But week in and week out there was/were fights.

I guess my point is that it isn't guns/knives/slingshots/staplers (wicked cut once from a staple ) it's about mindset. You get yobs and douche bags in every society and if they are looking for violence they tend to be able to find it or manage to create it for themselves.

Ahtman wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:That argument takes no notice of the fact that many countries (the UK, Japan, most Euro countries) have quite strict gun laws and do not have a big problem with gun crime. Criminals in these countries can get hold of guns and mainly use them to settle arguments between themselves. British police aren't even armed, except for special units.

It also doesn't take note of the massive population differences or the massive cultural differences. Japan's suicide rate is enourmous when compared to the UK, US, and most Euro companies. Why can't they be more like the rest of us?

You are precisely right. What is it about US society that makes it so gun violent compared to many other societies that either have lots of guns (Switzerland, Canada) or don't (Japan, most of Europe.)

The suicide issue is completely irrelevant, unless perhaps you wish to theorise that committing suicide a lot helps prevent gun crime.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:

malfred wrote:

Ace_of_Spades wrote: she was going to beat his ass with her ASP baton.

She's feisty!

Raw-ow-r?

Sorry, what does this mean? Should I have said "butt" or "glutieus maximus".

About the level of violence in the UK and Japan...I'm from TX but I spent 8 years in the UK (4.5 living north of London) and 8 years in Japan (Mom's from Okinawa)...so let me weigh in on both. Growing up I didn't see a lot of violence in either country (but the Japanese have some ultra violent anime) unless you add "soccer violence" since I played in both countries. But when I got older and was stationed back in each country I saw my fair share of violence.

Sorry to say this to all the British Bros on board but I saw a ton more violence in the UK. For awhile we (mil types) were banned from most of the pubs/clubs around the base because of fights with locals. At the time there was a problem with "Yanks" getting jumped by local guys who were angry with them for talking/dancing/dating some of those beautiful British women. Unfortunately most Yanks don't go party by themselves. So the fights were never little affairs.

So you'd end up with Yanks and the girls we would meet and the pissed of local suitor and his mates throwing down. It got so bad that the nearest pubs/clubs we could go to where almost 15 miles away from base.

This was a regular occurance and we could never figure out why. We were under orders not to fight and most of us didn't go lookng for fights since we knew the book would be thrown at us. But week in and week out there was/were fights.

I guess my point is that it isn't guns/knives/slingshots/staplers (wicked cut once from a staple ) it's about mindset. You get yobs and douche bags in every society and if they are looking for violence they tend to be able to find it or manage to create it for themselves.

My point was about gun crime, not violence.

The UK has strict gun laws so only criminals can easily get hold of guns. You can buy a pistol or SMG for a few hundred pounds. Yet our rate of crime involving guns is much lower than the US. This contradicts the theory advanced by some posters that possession of guns by law abiding citizens deters gun crime.

You are quite right about the mindset and social issues. Violence manifests itself in different ways.