|
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. |
Zurich15345 Posts
On December 26 2012 07:40 iplayBANJO wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 07:22 zatic wrote:On December 26 2012 05:03 iplayBANJO wrote:On December 26 2012 04:52 Donger wrote:On December 26 2012 04:43 Marathi wrote:On December 26 2012 04:35 Donger wrote:On December 26 2012 04:34 Marathi wrote:
sunprince do you sleep spooning your rifle with one eye open? How can you live in a country you're so afraid is going to turn on you?
Also insurgents in Iraq/Afghan would be no problem at all if we weren't playing by the rules. They know how to use children and women to their advantage knowing that hiding around them prevents them from being hit by return fire or bombing runs.
A tyrannical government would not probably care for such rules of engagement and you would be obliterated by a missile you would never see coming. What good is a government if you kill everyone you control? *edit* Point is, the rules may change. But they would still be playing by rules. I don't even.. They wouldn't kill everybody. They just wouldn't go through the same terms of engagement that we do when in other countries (coalition forces in iraq/afghan). If you opposed them you would be wiped out quickly as would those who lived with you. If you don't want to be a part of the new regime be prepared to either be killed or put forward for very hard labour. You only need to look at Nazi Germany, Saddam, Communist Russia and China to realize that. You're with them or you're against them and if you're against them they will get rid of you by whatever means necessary. Look at the example you gave in your previous post. From what I could gather, your point was that we would turn the middle east to glass and be on our merry way. If a government were to do that same method to it's own country what I said is very accurate. So don't try and act dumbfounded by my response. The examples you gave now involve a systematic removal of people. But there were civilians left over that were against the regime but were not vocal. Of each of the examples you gave how many do you think had an armed populace? I don't know myself but I'd imagine that it wasn't many. Nazi Germany disarmed the jewish peoples before they were moved to the ghettos, I remember that one because it's one of those talking points used by the NRA constantly because it it does happen to be true and helps them sell their point against removing peoples right to gun ownership. Nazi Germany also relaxed or flat out abolished most existing gun control legislation for the general population, a point conveniently ignored by the NRA. Fact is that it was never easier to own a gun for a German than it was in Nazi Germany. An armed and belligerent populace was a Nazi ideal. It was my understanding that the relaxation of gun control was only applicable to members of the Nazi party, which seems to coincide with the information on the linked Wikipedia page, as it was a fear based legislative act based on the conception that all peoples outside of the Nazi party were to be treated as hostile. It also maintained mandatory gun registrations by the seller or manufacturer. So while it certainly did increase the availability of weapons in Germany during the time, it only really did so for the "right kinds" or Germans.
Removal of all restrictions was only for NSDAP members (and other groups like any government officials). Gun laws were still very much relaxed for everyone else.
Of course the idea was the "the right kind" of German would be the ones having the guns. My point is it's a very poor argument for guns being a necessity against dictatorship, when the most archetypical dictatorship in history did considerably loosen or abolish gun control.
|
On December 26 2012 07:47 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 07:40 iplayBANJO wrote:On December 26 2012 07:22 zatic wrote:On December 26 2012 05:03 iplayBANJO wrote:On December 26 2012 04:52 Donger wrote:On December 26 2012 04:43 Marathi wrote:On December 26 2012 04:35 Donger wrote:On December 26 2012 04:34 Marathi wrote:
sunprince do you sleep spooning your rifle with one eye open? How can you live in a country you're so afraid is going to turn on you?
Also insurgents in Iraq/Afghan would be no problem at all if we weren't playing by the rules. They know how to use children and women to their advantage knowing that hiding around them prevents them from being hit by return fire or bombing runs.
A tyrannical government would not probably care for such rules of engagement and you would be obliterated by a missile you would never see coming. What good is a government if you kill everyone you control? *edit* Point is, the rules may change. But they would still be playing by rules. I don't even.. They wouldn't kill everybody. They just wouldn't go through the same terms of engagement that we do when in other countries (coalition forces in iraq/afghan). If you opposed them you would be wiped out quickly as would those who lived with you. If you don't want to be a part of the new regime be prepared to either be killed or put forward for very hard labour. You only need to look at Nazi Germany, Saddam, Communist Russia and China to realize that. You're with them or you're against them and if you're against them they will get rid of you by whatever means necessary. Look at the example you gave in your previous post. From what I could gather, your point was that we would turn the middle east to glass and be on our merry way. If a government were to do that same method to it's own country what I said is very accurate. So don't try and act dumbfounded by my response. The examples you gave now involve a systematic removal of people. But there were civilians left over that were against the regime but were not vocal. Of each of the examples you gave how many do you think had an armed populace? I don't know myself but I'd imagine that it wasn't many. Nazi Germany disarmed the jewish peoples before they were moved to the ghettos, I remember that one because it's one of those talking points used by the NRA constantly because it it does happen to be true and helps them sell their point against removing peoples right to gun ownership. Nazi Germany also relaxed or flat out abolished most existing gun control legislation for the general population, a point conveniently ignored by the NRA. Fact is that it was never easier to own a gun for a German than it was in Nazi Germany. An armed and belligerent populace was a Nazi ideal. It was my understanding that the relaxation of gun control was only applicable to members of the Nazi party, which seems to coincide with the information on the linked Wikipedia page, as it was a fear based legislative act based on the conception that all peoples outside of the Nazi party were to be treated as hostile. It also maintained mandatory gun registrations by the seller or manufacturer. So while it certainly did increase the availability of weapons in Germany during the time, it only really did so for the "right kinds" or Germans. Removal of all restrictions was only for NSDAP members (and other groups like any government officials). Gun laws were still very much relaxed for everyone else. Of course the idea was the "the right kind" of German would be the ones having the guns. My point is it's a very poor argument for guns being a necessity against dictatorship, when the most archetypical dictatorship in history did considerably loosen or abolish gun control.
It's certainly a good point, and I'll have to check up on the other armed political and cultural revolutions in states like Russia, China, and Iran (and maybe even some of the failed or ongoing ones like in Syria) to see if there are any parallels. It would be interesting if it turned out that all of the large political upheavals in recent history revolved around lax gun control, regardless of their outcome. I'm not saying it would change my faith in the intention and effectiveness of the 2nd amendment on American political freedoms, but it would definitely be worth knowing.
|
Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread:
From ABC News
A newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsShow nested quote +A newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn.
Not really, just a shit newspaper doing shit "journalism". What's new.
|
On December 25 2012 19:34 foxmeep wrote:
A gun isn't the only means of protecting your family. Ever heard of a lock? Even a taser would be a viable option over a gun.
Edit: Hypothetical question to all you pro-gun people out there. If the government issued an assault rifle to every single adult in the US so they had the means to defend themselves, would you support this?
I wouldn't support it if they just meant to hand them out to anyone.. like show up to your door on the day you turn an adult (what age are we talking?) and congratulates you with a rifle.. and bolts..
If it was something like once you become an adult you have to go to some place where you'd receive the rifle.. after you complete lessons on how/when to properly use the rifle.. and how to maintain the rifle. Only after the adult shows they can handle this and aren't a danger to other people.. take that bad boy home!
On December 26 2012 07:18 zatic wrote:
Sure, IF you know an old guy who doesn't miss his gun, and IF you know where he keeps the gun, and IF the old guy breaks the law and doesn't keep his gun in a gun safe, and IF you have an insane friend who risks a jail sentence for stealing a gun for a random American tourist, then no, Europe does not have any measure to stop you from taking this gun to another country.
I don't really understand the point of the question though. Europe doesn't have any measure of stopping you from carrying a gun you found in the dumpster either. It's just not something that will happen.
You don't understand because you can't think like a criminal.. If you can tell me that where you live is free of crime then I'll believe you when you say it would be impossible for me to get a gun from somewhere in Europe. I will concede that it will highly unlikely for me ever to get a gun because I never plan on going..
On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsA newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn.
I think this would be bad for the people who didn't have guns.. I wouldn't care if they posted my areas
|
Just wait for one of them to get randomly robbed or have their stuff vandalized and watch them sue the newspaper for causing it.
|
On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsShow nested quote +A newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn.
This is extremely bad mannered and irresponsible behavior by the editors and publishers of that paper.
|
On December 26 2012 10:25 AmericanNightmare wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2012 19:34 foxmeep wrote:
A gun isn't the only means of protecting your family. Ever heard of a lock? Even a taser would be a viable option over a gun.
Edit: Hypothetical question to all you pro-gun people out there. If the government issued an assault rifle to every single adult in the US so they had the means to defend themselves, would you support this? I wouldn't support it if they just meant to hand them out to anyone.. like show up to your door on the day you turn an adult (what age are we talking?) and congratulates you with a rifle.. and bolts.. If it was something like once you become an adult you have to go to some place where you'd receive the rifle.. after you complete lessons on how/when to properly use the rifle.. and how to maintain the rifle. Only after the adult shows they can handle this and aren't a danger to other people.. take that bad boy home! Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 07:18 zatic wrote:
Sure, IF you know an old guy who doesn't miss his gun, and IF you know where he keeps the gun, and IF the old guy breaks the law and doesn't keep his gun in a gun safe, and IF you have an insane friend who risks a jail sentence for stealing a gun for a random American tourist, then no, Europe does not have any measure to stop you from taking this gun to another country.
I don't really understand the point of the question though. Europe doesn't have any measure of stopping you from carrying a gun you found in the dumpster either. It's just not something that will happen. You don't understand because you can't think like a criminal.. If you can tell me that where you live is free of crime then I'll believe you when you say it would be impossible for me to get a gun from somewhere in Europe. I will concede that it will highly unlikely for me ever to get a gun because I never plan on going.. Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsA newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn. I think this would be bad for the people who didn't have guns.. I wouldn't care if they posted my areas
it's from another thread but it fits perfectly, what do you think about the following. Mostly because I hate hearing that argument all the time as well and consider it to be bullshit:
On December 26 2012 06:05 Matoo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2012 08:37 Sankanyo wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people do.
If you ban guns, the to-be murderers will get the guns one way or the other, while the defenders won't be able to. This only leads to bullets going one direction, and the wrong direction. I see this argument made all the time, that "murderers will get the guns one way or the others". But is there any evidence for that? The norwegian mass shooter tried to get weapons through illegal sources in the Czech Republic, but he couldn't so he went back to Norway to obtain them legally (which succeeded). And we're talking about one of the most meticulous, cold-blooded and well-prepared shooters out there, who prepared the attacks for years. Is the "average" mass shooter out there in the USA supposed to do better than that, rather than act on impulse and grab a knife, or drop his plan altogether because he realizes it's not as easy as he thought to become a cool hall-of-fame mass shooter? Of course since the USA is so saturated with guns, enacting strict gun control now would still give illegal guns a much higher availability than parts of the world who have had strict gun control for decades, but it would get better over time. Bleh. I'm just a French guy in the USA, I won't tell you how to do things. But if your solution to improve safety is to have everyone + dog conceal carry, I probably won't be around anymore when it's time for me to have kids. Sincerely hope that works out for you though, love the USA.
?
Noone's saying it's impossible unless you're stupid, in which case it probably is impossible to get a gun. However, if you know what you're doing it apparently still takes a lot of time and planning.
Of course you won't be able to stop people like Breivik like that but do you really think everyone involved in a shooting was someone like him?
|
On December 26 2012 07:47 zatic wrote:
Of course the idea was the "the right kind" of German would be the ones having the guns. My point is it's a very poor argument for guns being a necessity against dictatorship, when the most archetypical dictatorship in history did considerably loosen or abolish gun control.
WHAT IF..
This "Dictatorship", that had started as a democracy, was starting to lose control over that original populace that had given it all the power it currently had.. The people were realizing that they were fighting to many places around the world.. The people were even beginning to realize they were being duped by a "War on drugs" AND the "War on Terror".. If something wasn't done soon(not immediate) it would be bad for the people at the top who had been prospering.. They MIGHT even could go the way of old Nicholas #2..
But you'd probably say this couldn't happen.. I might agree with you.. A dictatorship couldn't ever legally be achieved using democracy.. A country would never establish military bases all over the world.. fighting or being involved in fighting almost anywhere and everywhere they wanted.. A mass of people would never fall for something as stupid as a "War on Drugs" or a "War on Terror"..None of that stuff could ever happen.. and most certainly ALL overthrows are peaceful and done by talking or people volunteering to give up their power..
|
On December 26 2012 10:41 Toadesstern wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 26 2012 10:25 AmericanNightmare wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2012 19:34 foxmeep wrote:
A gun isn't the only means of protecting your family. Ever heard of a lock? Even a taser would be a viable option over a gun.
Edit: Hypothetical question to all you pro-gun people out there. If the government issued an assault rifle to every single adult in the US so they had the means to defend themselves, would you support this? I wouldn't support it if they just meant to hand them out to anyone.. like show up to your door on the day you turn an adult (what age are we talking?) and congratulates you with a rifle.. and bolts.. If it was something like once you become an adult you have to go to some place where you'd receive the rifle.. after you complete lessons on how/when to properly use the rifle.. and how to maintain the rifle. Only after the adult shows they can handle this and aren't a danger to other people.. take that bad boy home! Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 07:18 zatic wrote:
Sure, IF you know an old guy who doesn't miss his gun, and IF you know where he keeps the gun, and IF the old guy breaks the law and doesn't keep his gun in a gun safe, and IF you have an insane friend who risks a jail sentence for stealing a gun for a random American tourist, then no, Europe does not have any measure to stop you from taking this gun to another country.
I don't really understand the point of the question though. Europe doesn't have any measure of stopping you from carrying a gun you found in the dumpster either. It's just not something that will happen. You don't understand because you can't think like a criminal.. If you can tell me that where you live is free of crime then I'll believe you when you say it would be impossible for me to get a gun from somewhere in Europe. I will concede that it will highly unlikely for me ever to get a gun because I never plan on going.. Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsA newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn. I think this would be bad for the people who didn't have guns.. I wouldn't care if they posted my areas it's from another thread but it fits perfectly, what do you think about the following. Mostly because I hate hearing that argument all the time as well and consider it to be bullshit: On December 26 2012 06:05 Matoo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2012 08:37 Sankanyo wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people do.
If you ban guns, the to-be murderers will get the guns one way or the other, while the defenders won't be able to. This only leads to bullets going one direction, and the wrong direction. I see this argument made all the time, that "murderers will get the guns one way or the others". But is there any evidence for that? The norwegian mass shooter tried to get weapons through illegal sources in the Czech Republic, but he couldn't so he went back to Norway to obtain them legally (which succeeded). And we're talking about one of the most meticulous, cold-blooded and well-prepared shooters out there, who prepared the attacks for years. Is the "average" mass shooter out there in the USA supposed to do better than that, rather than act on impulse and grab a knife, or drop his plan altogether because he realizes it's not as easy as he thought to become a cool hall-of-fame mass shooter? Of course since the USA is so saturated with guns, enacting strict gun control now would still give illegal guns a much higher availability than parts of the world who have had strict gun control for decades, but it would get better over time. Bleh. I'm just a French guy in the USA, I won't tell you how to do things. But if your solution to improve safety is to have everyone + dog conceal carry, I probably won't be around anymore when it's time for me to have kids. Sincerely hope that works out for you though, love the USA. ? Noone's saying it's impossible unless you're stupid, in which case it probably is impossible to get a gun. However, if you know what you're doing it apparently still takes a lot of time and planning. Of course you won't be able to stop people like Breivik like that but do you really think everyone involved in a shooting was someone like him?
I had seen someone say it was impossible.. I'm just curious because I have zero interest in ever setting foot there and my wife has already seen a good portion of it.. I had just seen people repeatedly say.. "you could never get one here anywhere".. It caused me to think. It couldn't be that hard if I really wanted to.. AND if I really wanted to I could if I took my time..
|
On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsShow nested quote +A newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn.
This is an absolute awesome idea! With this information publicly available, criminals wouldn't dare to enter these houses. Guns are there for protection after all! Am I right? 
|
On December 26 2012 11:17 furymonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsA newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn. This is an absolute awesome idea! With this information publicly available, criminals wouldn't dare to enter these houses. Guns are there for protection after all! Am I right?
Yeah, you're totally correct. Listing peoples private details not because they are doing something wrong or illegal but because you disagree with them is totally awesome.
|
On December 26 2012 07:18 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 03:00 AmericanNightmare wrote:On December 25 2012 23:13 zatic wrote:Sure, if you have a "friend" that will illegally sell you a gun that is registered to him (who in their right mind would do that?), then it would be easy to get a gun illegally. It's just not a scenario that will happen. It's probably much easier to simply get your license and get a gun legally in most of Europe. It will take a while though. So yeah, it is very hard to get a gun quickly in Europe, legal or illegal. See here: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=241586 (Thanks for the link.. I learned a bit) Let's say it's not his gun.. I'm a tourist from America, who happens to be the guys friend.. I offer him twice the store price if he were to steal his neighbors pistol (we'll say it's some old guy who won't notice it gone for maybe a week) What counter-measures are around Europe that would stop me from taking this pistol to any other country? Sure, IF you know an old guy who doesn't miss his gun, and IF you know where he keeps the gun, and IF the old guy breaks the law and doesn't keep his gun in a gun safe, and IF you have an insane friend who risks a jail sentence for stealing a gun for a random American tourist, then no, Europe does not have any measure to stop you from taking this gun to another country. I don't really understand the point of the question though. Europe doesn't have any measure of stopping you from carrying a gun you found in the dumpster either. It's just not something that will happen.
Your "if" situation is what happened with the Connecticut shooting.
IF someone you know owns a gun (mother) and IF you know where they keep the gun and IF they break the law and keep their gun in an unsafe place (allow for unauthorized use) and IF you break the law and steal their gun and IF you are feeling like ending your life with a (lack of a better word) bang.
These incidents can happen anywhere. The real problem isn't the gun laws in America but the mental health care it provides.
*edit*
@ furymonkey
Totally agree with you too. When I get my own place I plan on purchasing a shotgun for home defense and I would rather that information be public knowledge and easily accessible so that a burglar would be less inclined to enter my house.
|
On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsShow nested quote +A newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn.
Why on earth is information on private citizens available freely?
|
On December 26 2012 12:35 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 11:17 furymonkey wrote:On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsA newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn. This is an absolute awesome idea! With this information publicly available, criminals wouldn't dare to enter these houses. Guns are there for protection after all! Am I right? Yeah, you're totally correct. Listing peoples private details not because they are doing something wrong or illegal but because you disagree with them is totally awesome.
Think of this way, it's like having a "Beware of dogs" signs.
|
On December 26 2012 12:35 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 11:17 furymonkey wrote:On December 26 2012 09:16 Integra wrote:Decided to post this in the gun control thread instead of its own thread: From ABC NewsA newspaper in New York has received a wave of criticism from its readers after publishing the names and addresses of all of the individuals with handgun or pistol permits in its coverage area.
Hundreds of residents in New York’s Westchester and Rockland counties were surprised to find their names and addresses listed on a map posted by The Journal News on Sunday. Users can click any dot on the map to see which of their neighbors has a permit for a gun.
The map sparked more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public.
“This is CRAZY!! why in the world would you post every licensed gun owner information?? What do you hope to accomplish by doing this. This is the type of thing you do for sex offenders not law abiding gun owners. What next? should i hang a flag outside my house that says I own a gun? I am canceling my subscription with your paper today!!!” said commenter Curtis Maenza.
“How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families…,” wrote commenter George Thompson.
All of the names and addresses were compiled through public records. The paper also requested the information from Putnam County, which is still compiling the records for publication, according to The Journal News’ website.
In a statement to ABC News, The Journal News said its readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” because of the conversation about gun control on its website after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
“We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law requests. We also requested information on the number and types of guns owned by permit holders, but officials in the county clerks offices in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties maintained that those specifics were not public record,” the statement read.
“New York’s top public-records expert, Robert Freeman, disagrees,” it added.
The paper declined to answer further questions about the map.
The map(s), which are highly detailed, can be viewed at http://www.lohud.com The newspaper is also planning to Map more areas. I think this whole debate took a new turn. This is an absolute awesome idea! With this information publicly available, criminals wouldn't dare to enter these houses. Guns are there for protection after all! Am I right? Yeah, you're totally correct. Listing peoples private details not because they are doing something wrong or illegal but because you disagree with them is totally awesome.
Not that I'm codoning what that paper did, but ... it does illustrate how cheap and fallacious the NRA argument that 'guns make people safer' actually is.
They say guns don't kill people, but they don't save people either. And as this newspaper irresponsibly illustrated, it's not that hard to endanger gun owners without the use of guns, at all.
|
Zurich15345 Posts
On December 26 2012 10:52 AmericanNightmare wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 07:47 zatic wrote:
Of course the idea was the "the right kind" of German would be the ones having the guns. My point is it's a very poor argument for guns being a necessity against dictatorship, when the most archetypical dictatorship in history did considerably loosen or abolish gun control. WHAT IF.. This "Dictatorship", that had started as a democracy, was starting to lose control over that original populace that had given it all the power it currently had.. The people were realizing that they were fighting to many places around the world.. The people were even beginning to realize they were being duped by a "War on drugs" AND the "War on Terror".. If something wasn't done soon(not immediate) it would be bad for the people at the top who had been prospering.. They MIGHT even could go the way of old Nicholas #2.. But you'd probably say this couldn't happen.. I might agree with you.. A dictatorship couldn't ever legally be achieved using democracy.. A country would never establish military bases all over the world.. fighting or being involved in fighting almost anywhere and everywhere they wanted.. A mass of people would never fall for something as stupid as a "War on Drugs" or a "War on Terror"..None of that stuff could ever happen.. and most certainly ALL overthrows are peaceful and done by talking or people volunteering to give up their power..
That line of reasoning is fine, just don't go full godwin and drag Hitler into it.
|
On December 26 2012 07:08 J_Slim wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 06:58 Millitron wrote:On December 26 2012 06:52 LunaSea wrote:
For people using the argument of a hypothetical tyrannical government :
- Do you really think that your co-citizens are going to riot / become guerrillas when your government switches the power-grid off ? I would hope so. Regardless, not having help does not change what is right, it just changes how you have to work towards what is right. The more help you have, the more open you can be with your resistance. If the populace hangs you out to dry, you just have to be smarter about what you do. Shit like this is what scares me. what is "right" is a relative term. If the entire populace disagrees with you and your group of rebels, how can you know you're fighting for 'right.' You will have become exactly what America has been fighting the last 10+ years... just another terrorist.
i have been following millitron's posts in this thread. he doesn't scare me at all, he seems very reasonable. i am not very knowledgeable on the subject, but if i were to try to form an articulated opinion i think it would be biased towards his line of reasoning. the theme, of which you are probably not aware, of the last line in your post however has been causing me some distress for the last 2 years or so.
|
On December 26 2012 15:44 Donger wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2012 07:18 zatic wrote:On December 26 2012 03:00 AmericanNightmare wrote:On December 25 2012 23:13 zatic wrote:Sure, if you have a "friend" that will illegally sell you a gun that is registered to him (who in their right mind would do that?), then it would be easy to get a gun illegally. It's just not a scenario that will happen. It's probably much easier to simply get your license and get a gun legally in most of Europe. It will take a while though. So yeah, it is very hard to get a gun quickly in Europe, legal or illegal. See here: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=241586 (Thanks for the link.. I learned a bit) Let's say it's not his gun.. I'm a tourist from America, who happens to be the guys friend.. I offer him twice the store price if he were to steal his neighbors pistol (we'll say it's some old guy who won't notice it gone for maybe a week) What counter-measures are around Europe that would stop me from taking this pistol to any other country? Sure, IF you know an old guy who doesn't miss his gun, and IF you know where he keeps the gun, and IF the old guy breaks the law and doesn't keep his gun in a gun safe, and IF you have an insane friend who risks a jail sentence for stealing a gun for a random American tourist, then no, Europe does not have any measure to stop you from taking this gun to another country. I don't really understand the point of the question though. Europe doesn't have any measure of stopping you from carrying a gun you found in the dumpster either. It's just not something that will happen. Your "if" situation is what happened with the Connecticut shooting. IF someone you know owns a gun (mother) and IF you know where they keep the gun and IF they break the law and keep their gun in an unsafe place (allow for unauthorized use) and IF you break the law and steal their gun and IF you are feeling like ending your life with a (lack of a better word) bang. These incidents can happen anywhere. The real problem isn't the gun laws in America but the mental health care it provides. *edit* @ furymonkey Totally agree with you too. When I get my own place I plan on purchasing a shotgun for home defense and I would rather that information be public knowledge and easily accessible so that a burglar would be less inclined to enter my house.
How do you provide mental health care for people that don't appear to require it?
|
On February 20 2012 11:34 Heweree wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 11:25 ClanRH.TV wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1b1ke.jpg) And the second graph is: Who Has the Most Gun ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cf3ee.jpg) I can tell you for a reason that not 30% of the french population has guns. The only guns citizens have are hunting firearms. Did they just take into account all the guns owned by the police and the military and divided it by the total population? It's the only way they found this numbers. And it would be dumb since the police and military weapons are not available to anyone. I lived 8 years in France, and I don't know ANYONE who owns a gun. The only people who own guns are hunters but they aren't many, like 1% of the population maximum.
Hunting rifles are obviously included here. Such weapons in sweden are not designed for mass murder. It's also very rarely those kind of rifles that are used in shootings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
