EPTan other option is to make all guns illegal for everyone, and then the sociopaths get them --> civilians don't ---> cops late for party and many people dead
If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
an other option is to make all guns illegal for everyone, and then the sociopaths get them --> civilians don't ---> cops late for party and many people dead | ||
|
MrBitter
United States2940 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:00 biology]major wrote: let concealed carry be allowed inside schools, and have the people with permits (staff and teachers) receive basic training from local law enforcement. Do background checks or psych evals if necessary. Right now, schools are just exposed territory with 0 protection, and shit like newtown can happen anytime. Combine that with assault rifle ban, and you are empowering civilians while weakening the sociopaths. an other option is to make all guns illegal for everyone, and then the sociopaths get them --> civilians don't ---> cops late for party and many people dead This is something a lot of people have been suggesting lately. Personally, I think I like the idea of there being trained, armed personnel on staff in our schools, and arming the teachers would be far cheaper than hiring extra staff like a full time campus cop. | ||
|
Yenticha
257 Posts
On December 19 2012 16:36 Gospadin wrote: So in Australia, a gun ban lowered the homicide rate from 0.43 to 0.25. That law "saves" about 0.18 lives per 100k per year, which is about 40 lives/year in Australia. Meanwhile, the violent crime rate in Australia is ~850 assaults per 100k and over 100 rapes per 100k. That's a 30% increase in violent assaults since the NFA was enacted in Australia. Meanwhile in the USA, while homicide rates are higher, violent crime is about 400 per 100k (assault + rape + kidnapping + robbery + manslaughter + homicide). Our rates have gone down steadily since ~1980. Rape is about 33 per 100k in the USA. This means that you're 3x as likely to get assaulted or raped in Australia as you are in the USA. Sorry, but I think the chances that the potential victims are armed is having the correct effect. Sources: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent crime.html and wikipedia for USA stats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Violent_crime As to why allowing a regular joe to own anything, it's because having 30 bullets versus 10 bullets is immaterial to the criminal. A law abiding citizen won't misuse them anyway. So, should I conclude that taking away assault rifles would increase rape rate? Because, a handgun is not enough to scare rapists away, now you need a M16? Sorry, you still do NOT answer my main question: what could be the downside to banning assault rifles for regular joes? But thanks for the numbers, I guess it shows Australia is different from USA. | ||
|
Legion710
Canada423 Posts
It's just beyond me that YOU STILL DON'T GET that you don't get rid of gun problems with MORE GUNS. | ||
|
binkman
Australia40 Posts
On December 19 2012 16:36 Gospadin wrote: So in Australia, a gun ban lowered the homicide rate from 0.43 to 0.25. That law "saves" about 0.18 lives per 100k per year, which is about 40 lives/year in Australia. Meanwhile, the violent crime rate in Australia is ~850 assaults per 100k and over 100 rapes per 100k. That's a 30% increase in violent assaults since the NFA was enacted in Australia. Meanwhile in the USA, while homicide rates are higher, violent crime is about 400 per 100k (assault + rape + kidnapping + robbery + manslaughter + homicide). Our rates have gone down steadily since ~1980. Rape is about 33 per 100k in the USA. This means that you're 3x as likely to get assaulted or raped in Australia as you are in the USA. Sorry, but I think the chances that the potential victims are armed is having the correct effect. Sources: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent crime.html and wikipedia for USA stats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Violent_crime As to why allowing a regular joe to own anything, it's because having 30 bullets versus 10 bullets is immaterial to the criminal. A law abiding citizen won't misuse them anyway. Those two sets of data aren't using the same definition of assault. The wikipedia figures are for the felony charge of aggravated assault, which usually implies assault with a deadly weapon. The Australian statistics are based on a more broad definition of assault, that is; "The ABS defines assault as the direct infliction of force, injury or violence upon a person, including attempts or threats. It excludes sexual assault." Similarly you are using a comparison between rape stats in the USA, versus sexual assault in the Australian case. Of course the number of incidents of sexual assault is higher than the number of 'forcible rapes'. | ||
|
ninini
Sweden1204 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:00 biology]major wrote: let concealed carry be allowed inside schools, and have the people with permits (staff and teachers) receive basic training from local law enforcement. Do background checks or psych evals if necessary. Right now, schools are just exposed territory with 0 protection, and shit like newtown can happen anytime. Combine that with assault rifle ban, and you are empowering civilians while weakening the sociopaths. an other option is to make all guns illegal for everyone, and then the sociopaths get them --> civilians don't ---> cops late for party and many people dead That's not true. In Sweden guns are pretty much illegal for everybody, but that also means that the unstable sociopaths don't have access to them here. The only ppl here who have access to guns are the police and organized criminals, but organized criminals tend to use their weapons responsibly, as it's part of their job to use their weapons in a detached and logical way, so they are not a threat to normal citizens. If you live in Sweden and you get shot, statistically you're either a criminal, or in somewhat rare cases, you're involved with a criminal. Situations other than those two are so rare that they are not even worth considering. When there are heavy restrictions on weapons, wanna-be gangsters and emotionally unstable teenagers/young adults don't have access to them. As a typical swedish young adult, I personally wouldn't even know where to look, if I wanted to get a gun, and if I tried to figure out, that alone could get me into trouble. If I was involved in crime, it wouldn't be impossible, but like I pointed out, ppl who are involved in organized crime, and ppl who carry out school shootings are two very distant archetypes, plus, getting access to a gun is very hard when there are major restrictions, no matter what scene you come from, and most ppl who does school shootings does not have the drive that is necessary to successfully obtain a gun, or else they wouldn't even attempt this form of extended suicide. In this case, civilians did have access to guns, and still it didn't seem to help. Please stop this guns for defense mumbo jumbo. It's ridiculous to hand out guns to ppl outside of the police or military. Teachers aren't equipped for handling guns, and they are not trained or even suitable for handling these situations. You can't expect that they would use them responsibly, even with training. These teachers would create additional problems that don't exist today. You can't count on them being able to shoot accurately, so they could be harmful towards others, and they could escalate a situation without doing anything good. You can't count on them being able to fire at a student who they see on a everyday basis, and might even be emotionally invested in. You also can't count on them being able to evaluate the sense of danger, so they might bring out the gun in situations where it wasn't necessary. There are countless of problems with the idea of giving guns to teachers. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10806 Posts
I would love to bet on how many days it would take until one of them swings it around to "defend" himself because he can't keep his class or a student under "control/quiet"... An absolutely and totally ridiculous idea from just about every angle you can look at it. The problem is: People that should not get guns, get guns in the US (easily). Solutions: Remove people that should not get guns --> Impossible. Remove/reduce Guns --> Possible. | ||
|
WikidSik
Canada382 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10806 Posts
You can also kill people with other stuff than a gun even an argument? The gun makes it so easy to kill that even people who never ever would have the stomach/power/whatever to kill someone with something that needs some "force"... Let alone killing 1X people in a few minutes. Guns are not the reason that these killing sprees are "attempted", BUT they are the tool that makes them possible. Iirc there have been a few masskilling (attempts) with knives/other Stuff... But they, for very obvious reasons, were nowhere near as deadly. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5599 Posts
| ||
|
Keldrath
United States449 Posts
On December 19 2012 16:36 Gospadin wrote: So in Australia, a gun ban lowered the homicide rate from 0.43 to 0.25. That law "saves" about 0.18 lives per 100k per year, which is about 40 lives/year in Australia. Meanwhile, the violent crime rate in Australia is ~850 assaults per 100k and over 100 rapes per 100k. That's a 30% increase in violent assaults since the NFA was enacted in Australia. Meanwhile in the USA, while homicide rates are higher, violent crime is about 400 per 100k (assault + rape + kidnapping + robbery + manslaughter + homicide). Our rates have gone down steadily since ~1980. Rape is about 33 per 100k in the USA. This means that you're 3x as likely to get assaulted or raped in Australia as you are in the USA. Sorry, but I think the chances that the potential victims are armed is having the correct effect. Sources: http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent crime.html and wikipedia for USA stats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Violent_crime As to why allowing a regular joe to own anything, it's because having 30 bullets versus 10 bullets is immaterial to the criminal. A law abiding citizen won't misuse them anyway. Why do I see this australia thing so often suddenly? http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp "In the specific case offered here, context is the most important factor. The piece quoted above leads the reader to believe that much of the Australian citizenry owned handguns until their ownership was made illegal and all firearms owned by "law-abiding citizens" were collected by the government through a buy-back program in 1997. This is not so. Australian citizens do not (and never did) have a constitutional right to own firearms — even before the 1997 buyback program, handgun ownership in Australia was restricted to certain groups, such as those needing weapons for occupational reasons, members of approved sporting clubs, hunters, and collectors. Moreover, the 1997 buyback program did not take away all the guns owned by these groups; only some types of firearms (primarily semi-automatic and pump-action weapons) were banned. " | ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:06 MrBitter wrote: This is something a lot of people have been suggesting lately. Personally, I think I like the idea of there being trained, armed personnel on staff in our schools, and arming the teachers would be far cheaper than hiring extra staff like a full time campus cop. Yep, because clearly the solution to this problem is more guns. I'm just stunned that people would suggest arming teachers with any intent other than satire. | ||
|
Mazaire
Australia217 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:06 MrBitter wrote: This is something a lot of people have been suggesting lately. Personally, I think I like the idea of there being trained, armed personnel on staff in our schools, and arming the teachers would be far cheaper than hiring extra staff like a full time campus cop. I honestly hope that was a joke. | ||
|
Keldrath
United States449 Posts
On December 19 2012 20:40 Scarecrow wrote: Yep, because clearly the solution to this problem is more guns. I'm just stunned that people would suggest arming teachers with any intent other than satire. People are seriously saying it, politicians here have been saying it on the news now, hell my own father has been posting facebook photos saying the teachers should have been armed or this would have never happened... | ||
|
Alex1Sun
494 Posts
| ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
On December 19 2012 20:52 Keldrath wrote: People are seriously saying it, politicians here have been saying it on the news now, hell my own father has been posting facebook photos saying the teachers should have been armed or this would have never happened... On December 16 2012 22:36 Scarecrow wrote: If, according to gun lobbyists, guns make you and your family safer, then why shouldn't children feel as safe at school as they are at home? Every American teacher should have a military-grade firearm handy in case they need to defend themselves and their students. More gun saturation not less is surely the answer to this issue if they truly do increase public safety. There will also be the added bonus of a teacher-based militia versus the imminent threats of a tyrannical Obama or a North Korean/Iranian invasion. Damn Tea Party stealing all my ideas >.< | ||
|
QuXn
Germany71 Posts
all typical arguments are made from both sides in this video. the typical liberal who does not recognize any arguments and simply goes for the emotional train. it obviously ends in shouting match, as expected. | ||
|
NeWeNiyaLord
Norway2474 Posts
http://www.dbtv.no/?vid=2044640298001 He also pointed it at a friend for fun not knowing it was loaded. This is what happens when guns are easy to obtain. | ||
|
Zaqwe
591 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=388083 This is what happens when law abiding citizens are disarmed. After seeing how well gun control works in school zones how could anyone want to expand it? That's lunacy bordering on evil. | ||
|
Halozination
69 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
| ||
