Patrick Ewing pulls out his concealed pistol and shoots man attacking his sister

[NumberSix]

And like I pointed out earlier in this thread, all the illegal guns on Chicago's streets come from states like Texas that have lax gun laws. Same exact thing that has led to Mexico's gun violence problem (3 out of every 4 guns in Mexico were bought legally in the U.S., then resold illegally to the cartels).

Gun bans don't work if you can just buy assault rifles at any Wal-Mart in a nearby State with little to no gun control.

What's an assault rifle?

[warriorfan]

What's an assault rifle?

Usually defined as a semi automatic or automatic rifle that fires high velocity rounds and can hold large clips of ammunition

[DonDadda59]

What's an assault rifle?

This a trick question?



Something like that ^

[NumberSix]

This a trick question?



Something like that ^

Weird. It only says "rifle".

[Droid101]

Weird. It only says "rifle".

[Dresta]

DonDadda showing off his terribly literal, one track mind as usual

People like him who think over 300,000,000 guns can suddenly be rounded up and made unavailable, are, quite frankly, out of their damn minds. His type are almost always liberal and middle class people, living in safe suburban areas, and thinking no-one else has to fear things like home invasion, because he doesn't. Self-righteous twats, basically. The UK has very strict gun laws, and obtaining a gun is not difficult, particularly if you have a few friends with criminal connections; i knew people who had them, and have been threatened with one - this is on an island, the place where if gun-control could work, it would. America, with its vastness and widespread criminality, would be an absolute nightmare to live in as a law-abiding citizen were people given the same right of self-defense as in England.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co....w_and_com.html

Some highlights:

Like most 'liberal' solutions, they don't work against their intended target, and they attack freedom. It helps a great deal to be liberal about this if you a) don't think about it and b) know no history at all. Until 1920, Britain's gun laws made Texas look effeminate. There was no effective restriction at all on owning a firearm. Yet there was virtually no gun crime. Now we have some of the most restrictive anti-gun laws in the world, and gun crime is a serious and growing problem. Interestingly, the laws came first, the problem afterwards, and the recent ban on handguns was a completely logic-free response to the Dunblane mass-murder which preceded it.

Here's a strange fact. If you read the Sherlock Holmes stories, you will notice just how frequently Holmes and Watson take guns out on various missions (Watson’s is usually his trusty old service revolver, retained from his brush with war in Afghanistan). On one occasion, Holmes amuses himself by picking out the Royal monogram 'VR' in bullet-pocks above the fireplace, a remarkable tribute to his shooting ability with a handgun. His skills may have been exceptional, but gun ownership was, at the time the stories were written, entirely legal and normal, and nobody thought it odd.

Our small, easily-policed and largely urban society is deeply unlike the USA, where many people live hours from the nearest police station and can expect no immediate help if they are in dire trouble. But I do think that the continued existence of a legal right for law-abiding subjects to own and use weapons (actually set out in the 1689 Bill of Rights) is important. I'll explain why in a moment.

And I also think that strict gun laws are wholly ineffective against their targets. The guns used in crime are hardly ever legally obtained. The people who use them almost invariably have criminal convictions, which would disqualify them from legal gun ownership anyway. So you can pass as many laws against gun ownership as you like. It will have precisely no effect on the level of gun crime. In which case, why do it?

Well, partly to keep the dim liberals happy, of course, which is important these days. But could there be another reason? If the state and the people broadly agree, about most matters, then the state can license the people to do such things as defend themselves, make citizen's arrests, thump burglars, even keep weapons. (Every Swiss home contains arms and ammunition, and the Swiss crime problem is minor, to put it mildly).

Actually, I don't want us to become a gun-carrying, gun-owning society at all. I have absolutely no desire to own a gun or have one in my house. They are even more dangerous (which is saying something) than motor cars, which I - likewise - don’t much like using because of the heavy responsibility of being in control of such powerfully lethal machinery. And any burglar who arrives at my house will be given a cup of tea (choice of Indian, China or herbal) and a biscuit, and asked to sign a release form stating that he has not been harmed, intimidated or upset in any way. I understand the liberal criminal law well enough to know that this is the only sensible approach for a British burglary victim, who doesn't want to be handcuffed and put in the cells.

I don't want my neighbours to own guns, either. It shouldn't be necessary in a properly law-governed country.

But if the state believes that criminals are to be pitied and treated, while the people believe that criminals need to be punished, then the state cannot trust the people any longer.

And the people, likewise, cannot trust the state, which is becoming - increasingly - a tyranny which watches, dockets, snoops and generally pries into our lives, and grants us smaller and smaller limits within which we may live if we wish to avoid being interfered with by its agencies.

The same 'experts' who have banned guns and knives (with no noticeable effect on their use by criminals, though the harassment of innocents for carrying pen-knives grows year by year) pursue individuals for hitting burglars too hard or, in a notable incident last week, a pensioner who had clouted one of a gang of youths who had pelted his home with snowballs for hours on end.

Actually, I object strongly to the expression 'taking the law into your own hands'. The law is ours and we made it for ourselves, to protect us and govern us, as a free people. Our freedom to defend ourselves against criminal violence is part of our general freedom to live our lives lawfully. We hire the police to help us enforce the law, not to tell us that we cannot do so. Sadly, the modern British law is not our law, but an elite law, based on ideas which most of us do not share. And the modern police are the elite's police, not ours, which is one of the reasons why they have vanished from the streets, where we want them to be. The disarming of the people, and the cancellation of all their rights to defend themselves, are bad signs.

Amen to that.

As for all that stuff about guns being purchased legally in Texas and then moved and sold in different states or in Mexico, well, that is because it is the cheapest and most easily accessible market - getting rid of it would simply mean its shifting to a different means of acquisition, not the elimination of illegally obtained weaponry (honestly, what an idiotic thing to suggest). If Texas didn't sell guns there'd be 40% less weapons in Mexico, hurp-a-durp...

God damn, just think about what you're arguing for a second.

edit: an lol, these fools don't even know what an assault rifle is

Better to just call it a machine gun and save you all the confusion.

[DonDadda59]

DonDadda showing off his terribly literal, one track mind as usual

Have we met before?

People like him who think over 300,000,000 guns can suddenly be rounded up and made unavailable, are, quite frankly, out of their damn minds. His type are almost always liberal and middle class people, living in safe suburban areas, and thinking no-one else has to fear things like home invasion, because he doesn't.

I grew up in a township in South Africa during apartheid. Trust me, whatever neighborhood you think you've seen or heard of that's bad is Disneyland compared to where I'm from.

Everyone in Soweto had guns. Yet surprisingly, SA had the highest murder rate in the World for a while. Shocking.

Self-righteous twats, basically. The UK has very strict gun laws, and obtaining a gun is not difficult, particularly if you have a few friends with criminal connections; i knew people who had them, and have been threatened with one - this is on an island, the place where if gun-control could work, it would.

Wow, so you know somebody that knows somebody that knows something about it. That really changes England's gun murder rate though.

America, with its vastness and widespread criminality, would be an absolute nightmare to live in as a law-abiding citizen were people given the same right of self-defense as in England.

China has over 4 times the population of the U.S. and they have heavily regulated gun laws that bar citizens from owning firearms.

As for all that stuff about guns being purchased legally in Texas and then moved and sold in different states or in Mexico, well, that is because it is the cheapest and most easily accessible market - getting rid of it would simply mean its shifting to a different means of acquisition, not the elimination of illegally obtained weaponry (honestly, what an idiotic thing to suggest). If Texas didn't sell guns there'd be 40% less weapons in Mexico, hurp-a-durp..

So say you're the member of the Zetas in charge of keeping the troops well armed. Hypothetically speaking let's say the American pipeline of weapons was shut down completely and 70-90% of your source of weapons is gone. How and from where do you obtain the heavy weaponry you need to enforce your cartel's business interests?

Be specific.

[Droid101]

DonDadda showing off his terribly literal, one track mind as usual

People like him who think over 300,000,000 guns can suddenly be rounded up and made unavailable, are, quite frankly, out of their damn minds. His type are almost always liberal and middle class people, living in safe suburban areas, and thinking no-one else has to fear things like home invasion, because he doesn't. Self-righteous twats, basically. The UK has very strict gun laws, and obtaining a gun is not difficult, particularly if you have a few friends with criminal connections; i knew people who had them, and have been threatened with one - this is on an island, the place where if gun-control could work, it would. America, with its vastness and widespread criminality, would be an absolute nightmare to live in as a law-abiding citizen were people given the same right of self-defense as in England.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co....w_and_com.html

Some highlights:



Amen to that.

As for all that stuff about guns being purchased legally in Texas and then moved and sold in different states or in Mexico, well, that is because it is the cheapest and most easily accessible market - getting rid of it would simply mean its shifting to a different means of acquisition, not the elimination of illegally obtained weaponry (honestly, what an idiotic thing to suggest). If Texas didn't sell guns there'd be 40% less weapons in Mexico, hurp-a-durp...

God damn, just think about what you're arguing for a second.

edit: an lol, these fools don't even know what an assault rifle is

Better to just call it a machine gun and save you all the confusion.

Dresta literally dumb as hell.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...44&postcount=6

Its amazing people pay exorbitant costs (plus interest) to get the approval of a bunch of smug, phony, pretentious hacks with completely arbitrary qualifications for teaching others.

Yeah, we could get the same thing for free from Dresta.

[TheMan]

Dresta literally dumb as hell.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...44&postcount=6

That was one of the GOAT slays in ISH history, lmao

and yea, Dresta is a blowhard...always with his wall of text of crap

[Dresta]

Have we met before?





I grew up in a township in South Africa during apartheid. Trust me, whatever neighborhood you think you've seen or heard of that's bad is Disneyland compared to where I'm from.

Everyone in Soweto had guns. Yet surprisingly, SA had the highest murder rate in the World for a while. Shocking.



Wow, so you know somebody that knows somebody that knows something about it. That really changes England's gun murder rate though.



China has over 4 times the population of the U.S. and they have heavily regulated gun laws that bar citizens from owning firearms.



So say you're the member of the Zetas in charge of keeping the troops well armed. Hypothetically speaking let's say the American pipeline of weapons was shut down completely and 70-90% of your source of weapons is gone. How and from where do you obtain the heavy weaponry you need to enforce your cartel's business interests?

Be specific.

1. England's gun murder rate went up after the banning of handguns in 1997 - its homicide rate shot up by 50%. Not only that, but huge increases in the numbers of police (as if the US needs more police problems), and ubiquitous CCTV were the result:

http://crimepreventionresearchcenter...fter-gun-bans/

2. China is an autocratic police state devoid of political liberty; thanks, but no thanks. I suppose that is what you want America to be like? A giant beehive? I wouldn't be surprised. China also didn't have over 300,000,000 weapons already circulating.

3. There is no data regarding the majority of weapons in Mexico, and your 70-90% estimate is specious nonsense. Heavy weaponry coming from America? Give me a break: these guys have grenades, machine guns, and grenade launchers, none of which are available to buy legally in the US - where are they getting them from? Santa Claus? If you don't think people with as much money as these criminal gangs can't get hold of weapons without the aid of US gun shows, then your reason is utterly lost.

[DonDadda59]

1. England's gun murder rate went up after the banning of handguns in 1997 - its homicide rate shot up by 50%. Not only that, but huge increases in the numbers of police (as if the US needs more police problems), and ubiquitous CCTV were the result:

http://crimepreventionresearchcenter...fter-gun-bans/

You've got some bad information, son.

England and Wales Crime Rate Falls to Lowest Levels in 33 years (2014)

2. China is an autocratic police state devoid of political liberty; thanks, but no thanks. I suppose that is what you want America to be like? A giant beehive? I wouldn't be surprised. China also didn't have over 300,000,000 weapons already circulating.

So now your argument changes from the 'vastness' of the U.S. which has a population 1/4th the size of China... to politics? Bottom line is China does not allow its citizens to purchase/own guns outside of a few exceptions like hunting.

Check out their gun death rate or murder rate in general. The population debate holds no merit whatsoever.

3. There is no data regarding the majority of weapons in Mexico, and your 70-90% estimate is specious nonsense. Heavy weaponry coming from America? Give me a break: these guys have grenades, machine guns, and grenade launchers, none of which are available to buy legally in the US - where are they getting them from? Santa Claus? If you don't think people with as much money as these criminal gangs can't get hold of weapons without the aid of US gun shows, then your reason is utterly lost.

The ATF is on record that 90% of the guns used in crimes in Mexico comes from American dealerships.

The Justice Department released figures from 2006-2011 of weapons used in crimes and showed data pointing to 70% of the guns used being traced back to the U.S.

You never answered my question- if you're in charge of arming a cartel and the main supply line for your weapons, your next door neighbor, is cut off... how and from where specifically are you getting arms? Again, be as specific as possible. Thanks.

And the grenades and grenade launchers you mention (one of which was used to shoot down a Mexican military helicopter earlier this year in Jalisco) were most likely stolen from the Mexican army which is supplied heavily by the U.S.

[Hawker]

Just curious but how do you expect to remove guns from those that already have them?

In my opinion it is a culture issue, in Australia it's more evident than it's ever been to me. These people grow up with anti-gun propaganda and are raised to be scared of them. They follow the laws and are quite obedient to the government and all wear the same clothes throughout school. This creates a bit more of a community attitude where in America it's way more individualistic. Americans don't care as much about doing something for the good of humanity.

They also don't have the same history or demographics like America does. Like most countries in the world.

I'm not sure what the answer is to guns in America but taking guns out of law abiding citizens isn't one of them. You can't guarantee that everyone will give up their guns so you're putting law abiding citizens at risk by leaving them defenseless.

[NumberSix]

It wasnt always like this. The Port Arthur Day Massacre was the trigger that made everyone change their minds about gun-control. Australia also has a very macho conservative society as well ; bushrangers, Ned Kelly, Gold Rushes, Immigrants etc.

The only issue with America is the sheer size of the country. With so many guns around already, its impossible to try and stop.

It's not a matter of "macho". It's a matter of respecting people's rights as human beings. You have no right remove someone's ability to protect themselves. It's an utterly immoral idea.

I'm not interested in this "you're not allowed to protect yourself, but don't worry about that. We (the government) will protect you". You people can't even run a damn website. And half the people you hire to "protect and serve" are borderline retards who you don't properly train and abuse their power at every turn. We're supposed rely on these people with our lives?

[TheMan]

It's not a matter of "macho". It's a matter of respecting people's rights as human beings. You have no right remove someone's ability to protect themselves. It's an utterly immoral idea.

I'm not interested in this "you're not allowed to protect yourself, but don't worry about that. We (the government) will protect you". You people can't even run a damn website. And half the people you hire to "protect and serve" are borderline retards who you don't properly train and abuse their power at every turn. We're supposed rely on these people with our lives?

Good to see a conservative dude like yourself not suck every cop's ass like most on the right