How's that Gun Ban going?

DrTodd · Feb 2, 2011

Anti's say that if we had a complete, national firearm "ban", things would be MUCH better. Bloomberg, New York City Mayor, says if the US had a gun ban, NYC's violent crime rate would be non-existent because neighboring states are to blame. Being an island, imho the UK is a model test of that theory. Here is the latest "data":

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ry-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

(If this link becomes unusable at some time in the future, I will email the .pdf copy that I made... email me: drtoddw at gmail dot com)

stainless1911 · Feb 2, 2011

Sounds like mexicos gun problem, our fault too. This is like saying the blizzard is because of global warming.

Freedom First · Feb 2, 2011

It's all been said before...

The gun ban is working exactly as the government expected since gun bans are not done to reduce crime but as a step to achieve complete control of the populace.

stainless1911 · Feb 2, 2011

Crime pays. The .gov makes a fortune from crime, everything from added taxes for law enforcement, to fines and fees for years from the criminals, to the taxes generated from our purchases we make to replace what is loss as a result of the criminals actions, to health care costs for the same reasons, drugs and property siezed from the criminals and taxes and property gained from the death of the victims, special programs, research, and on and on and on it goes.

Gun control is a multi billion dollar a year business. An armed populace simply does not need a police force, all they would be doing is hiding behind billboards and bushes waiting to steal from the people for breaking one of their traffic club rules.

Venator · Feb 2, 2011

I'm an idiot

VW_Factor · Feb 2, 2011

Venator said:
Noticed Australia is second...hum... I'm sure strict gun control has nothing to do with this.....................:banghead:

That says Austria not Austrailia.

Edit : I thought the same thing when I first read over it. Then realized it was Austria. Surprised Austrailia isn't higher on the list anyway.

Haman J.T. · Feb 2, 2011

It's doing fine as intended.Control the law abiding(the majority of the people) by using the 'law".

Venator · Feb 2, 2011

VW_Factor said:
That says Austria not Austrailia.

Damn old age, and poor reading comprehension.

malignity · Feb 2, 2011

The gun ban seems to be working for Egypt. Their government is corrupt and not removing itself despite the people's cries, and the people are virtually powerless to stop it. This would all already be over already if they had guns.

And here people thought the second amendment was about hunting.

Haman J.T. · Feb 2, 2011

malignity said:
The gun ban seems to be working for Egypt. Their government is corrupt and not removing itself despite the people's cries, and the people are virtually powerless to stop it. This would all already be over already if they had guns.

And here people thought the second amendment was about hunting.

But the news said they have baseball bats,crowbars and molotov cocktails!Don't that count?

mastiff69 · Feb 2, 2011

Yup ham&eggs like the old saying ( like bringing a Knife to a Gun fight !)

reillo584 · Feb 2, 2011

malignity said:
The gun ban seems to be working for Egypt. Their government is corrupt and not removing itself despite the people's cries, and the people are virtually powerless to stop it. This would all already be over already if they had guns.

And here people thought the second amendment was about hunting.

Just hope people here in The U.S. start to realize this… (what the second amendment is really about)... :banghead:

stainless1911 · Feb 2, 2011

They won't know what they have got until its gone.

Badger Johnson · Feb 2, 2011

Bad argument

The 'ban guns' argument is not well considered.

If we look at the REAL beneficiaries of the right to bear arms, it's the old and infirm. After all, conceivably, the able-bodied could retreat. BUT the old and infirm, people in wheelchairs, canes and so forth, can NOT retreat, neither can they withstand as much injury. Grave bodily harm is too high of a standard for them.

I digress a bit but the point is, those who are weaker, women, older people, or disabled should have the right to an equalizer and pointed keychains and mace does not dissuade the true predator.

In addition, I think it should be made easier for women, the disabled and the elderly to OC and CC, in fact, why not have government subsidies for their first handgun?

If our g'ment truly cared about our safety they'd enact that tomorrow.

stainless1911 · Feb 2, 2011

I don't want to start down the slippery slope of deciding who is able bodied or to what extent, regarding the exercise of certain rights. I have yet to meet anyone able bodied enough to retreat at a faster rate than a bullet can advance.

pmcqueen37 · Feb 2, 2011

Yes, We all know how well Alcohol prohibition worked out, and drug prohibition is keeping this Country off of Drugs as well, so its a natural progression, outlaw guns and the gun crimes goes away. */sarcasm off/*

Badger Johnson · Feb 2, 2011

stainless1911 said:
I don't want to start down the slippery slope of deciding who is able bodied or to what extent, regarding the exercise of certain rights. I have yet to meet anyone able bodied enough to retreat at a faster rate than a bullet can advance.

Right. I was trying to make a counter-point argument against the idea of a gun ban. Those truly too weak to defend themselves by fighting or running need to have access to lethal (counter)force. So rather than change laws, take into account that some people can't retreat or take punishment (physical assault) and they deserve to be enabled to defend themselves.

Venator · Feb 2, 2011

Badger Johnson said:
The 'ban guns' argument is not well considered.

If we look at the REAL beneficiaries of the right to bear arms, it's the old and infirm. After all, conceivably, the able-bodied could retreat. BUT the old and infirm, people in wheelchairs, canes and so forth, can NOT retreat, neither can they withstand as much injury. Grave bodily harm is too high of a standard for them.

I digress a bit but the point is, those who are weaker, women, older people, or disabled should have the right to an equalizer and pointed keychains and mace does not dissuade the true predator.

In addition, I think it should be made easier for women, the disabled and the elderly to OC and CC, in fact, why not have government subsidies for their first handgun?

If our g'ment truly cared about our safety they'd enact that tomorrow.[/QUOTE]

It's not about safety. it's about control as you well know.

stainless1911 · Feb 2, 2011

True, but the right to defense without having to, or with or without the ability to retreat should belong to everyone. I see where you are coming from, perhaps a better approach would be to better promote the knowledge of the rights and use of those rights to those groupls you have correctly mentioned.

How's that Gun Ban going?

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator

stainless1911

Banned

Freedom First

Regular Member

stainless1911

Banned

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

VW_Factor

Regular Member

Haman J.T.

New member

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

malignity

Regular Member

Haman J.T.

New member

mastiff69

Regular Member

reillo584

Regular Member

stainless1911

Banned

Badger Johnson

Regular Member

stainless1911

Banned

pmcqueen37

Regular Member

Badger Johnson

Regular Member

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

stainless1911

Banned