|
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. |
On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:On May 25 2018 16:59 PoulsenB wrote:On May 25 2018 12:58 Orome wrote:
The military rifles are taken home without ammunition, so that's a pretty misleading statement in the first place.
For all the befuddling American right-wing insistence that any type of gun control is the mother of all evil though, I'm almost equally annoyed by the lazy 'gun control would fix all problems' approach. Appears to me that the problematic culture the US has built around guns runs much deeper than just accessability. I'm all for better forms of gun control, but I can't help feel that the endless and superficial discussions around it prevent questions that are just as important. Why so many Americans on this forum (over the years) have seriously and proudly proclaimed their need and right to shoot any robbers or burglars for example (should said burglars ever appear). While I'm all for responsible and properly regulated gun ownership, this burglar thing has been boggling my mind as well. Even in Poland we have people advocating widespread access to guns on the basis of "I need to defend my home against burglars", but you basically never hear of cases where burglars entered a home when the owner was inside - usually the criminals strike when people are away on vacation or sth like that. For me it reeks of a kinda wild-west power fantasy (and maybe even insecurity - as Professor Farsworth once said, "who needs courage when you have a gun?"). Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him. End of story. Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter... My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 06:21 Nixer wrote:On May 25 2018 05:38 superstartran wrote:On May 24 2018 20:54 Jockmcplop wrote:
So we have in Switzerland:
1: The ability of the police to check up on people with automatic weapons
2: Carry/conceal licenses for weapons
3: Criminal records mean you aren't allowed to own weapons, and they can be taken from you
4: Ownership/sale is illegal with exceptions (although from what I have read these are fairly loosely applied)
5: Specific permits to shoot weapons
Superstartran do you think applying some parts of the Swiss system to US law would be a good thing?
If so, which parts would you like to see applied to the US, and which parts wouldn't you?
It looks to me like this is a system that works well in Switzerland, although it has been designed for Switzerland and certainly wouldn't export particularly well. There's a cultural attitude at play where I would see this kind of system as very 'European' in nature. I'm not even sure what I mean by that, I know its vague but its a feeling I have.
However, if more gun control is being considered, America could certainly take some inspiration from these systems and laws. It's not just the system in place here; people don't realize that Switzerland already automatically has 200k-250k fully automatic military issue rifles at any given point in time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass shootings. Alot of this comes down to their culture surrounding firearms, and what the purpose of the firearm is used for. Yes, the system works, but the system only works if the culture and society in general accepts that system. Fairly certain they're converted into semi-automatic rifles. If they choose to purchase a rifle when they finish their service that is. There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians). On May 25 2018 06:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 05:38 superstartran wrote:On May 24 2018 20:54 Jockmcplop wrote:
So we have in Switzerland:
1: The ability of the police to check up on people with automatic weapons
2: Carry/conceal licenses for weapons
3: Criminal records mean you aren't allowed to own weapons, and they can be taken from you
4: Ownership/sale is illegal with exceptions (although from what I have read these are fairly loosely applied)
5: Specific permits to shoot weapons
Superstartran do you think applying some parts of the Swiss system to US law would be a good thing?
If so, which parts would you like to see applied to the US, and which parts wouldn't you?
It looks to me like this is a system that works well in Switzerland, although it has been designed for Switzerland and certainly wouldn't export particularly well. There's a cultural attitude at play where I would see this kind of system as very 'European' in nature. I'm not even sure what I mean by that, I know its vague but its a feeling I have.
However, if more gun control is being considered, America could certainly take some inspiration from these systems and laws. It's not just the system in place here; people don't realize that Switzerland already automatically has 200k-250k fully automatic military issue rifles at any given point in time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass shootings. Alot of this comes down to their culture surrounding firearms, and what the purpose of the firearm is used for. Yes, the system works, but the system only works if the culture and society in general accepts that system. The reddit poster you linked even says the military rifles are converted to semi-auto. What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc.
In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213).
215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all.
|
On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available.
On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:On May 25 2018 16:59 PoulsenB wrote:On May 25 2018 12:58 Orome wrote:
The military rifles are taken home without ammunition, so that's a pretty misleading statement in the first place.
For all the befuddling American right-wing insistence that any type of gun control is the mother of all evil though, I'm almost equally annoyed by the lazy 'gun control would fix all problems' approach. Appears to me that the problematic culture the US has built around guns runs much deeper than just accessability. I'm all for better forms of gun control, but I can't help feel that the endless and superficial discussions around it prevent questions that are just as important. Why so many Americans on this forum (over the years) have seriously and proudly proclaimed their need and right to shoot any robbers or burglars for example (should said burglars ever appear). While I'm all for responsible and properly regulated gun ownership, this burglar thing has been boggling my mind as well. Even in Poland we have people advocating widespread access to guns on the basis of "I need to defend my home against burglars", but you basically never hear of cases where burglars entered a home when the owner was inside - usually the criminals strike when people are away on vacation or sth like that. For me it reeks of a kinda wild-west power fantasy (and maybe even insecurity - as Professor Farsworth once said, "who needs courage when you have a gun?"). Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him. End of story. Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter... My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 06:21 Nixer wrote:On May 25 2018 05:38 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
It's not just the system in place here; people don't realize that Switzerland already automatically has 200k-250k fully automatic military issue rifles at any given point in time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass shootings. Alot of this comes down to their culture surrounding firearms, and what the purpose of the firearm is used for. Yes, the system works, but the system only works if the culture and society in general accepts that system. Fairly certain they're converted into semi-automatic rifles. If they choose to purchase a rifle when they finish their service that is. There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians). On May 25 2018 06:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 05:38 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
It's not just the system in place here; people don't realize that Switzerland already automatically has 200k-250k fully automatic military issue rifles at any given point in time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass shootings. Alot of this comes down to their culture surrounding firearms, and what the purpose of the firearm is used for. Yes, the system works, but the system only works if the culture and society in general accepts that system. The reddit poster you linked even says the military rifles are converted to semi-auto. What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. Show nested quote +In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all.
Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up.
Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000.
I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban.
|
On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available.
I don't have a side, please avoid trying to put on one to make your arguments easier.
|
On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available.
I think this might be one of those times we shouldn't attribute to malice what can easily be explained by ignorance (and desperation).
|
On May 26 2018 07:41 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. I think this might be one of those times we shouldn't attribute to malice what can easily be explained by ignorance (and desperation).
That pisses me off big time though. They are absolutely hypocritical, want to ban bumpstocks (which I actually agree with, there's 0 reason to have a fully automatic weapon), but then suddenly want to say it's ok to have relatively easy access to fully automatics? What?
|
On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:On May 25 2018 16:59 PoulsenB wrote:
[quote]
While I'm all for responsible and properly regulated gun ownership, this burglar thing has been boggling my mind as well. Even in Poland we have people advocating widespread access to guns on the basis of "I need to defend my home against burglars", but you basically never hear of cases where burglars entered a home when the owner was inside - usually the criminals strike when people are away on vacation or sth like that. For me it reeks of a kinda wild-west power fantasy (and maybe even insecurity - as Professor Farsworth once said, "who needs courage when you have a gun?"). Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him. End of story. Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter... My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 06:21 Nixer wrote:
[quote]
Fairly certain they're converted into semi-automatic rifles. If they choose to purchase a rifle when they finish their service that is. There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians). On May 25 2018 06:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:
[quote]
The reddit poster you linked even says the military rifles are converted to semi-auto. What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban.
I'll look it up. Thank you.
You can't mix metrics in this case. You can't say a 4.62 per 100k homicide rate is the same as a 137 per 100k knife incident. That's not fair to the argument at hand. Homicides should be compared to homicides. Agree?
On May 26 2018 07:43 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. I think this might be one of those times we shouldn't attribute to malice what can easily be explained by ignorance (and desperation). That pisses me off big time though. They are absolutely hypocritical, want to ban bumpstocks (which I actually agree with, there's 0 reason to have a fully automatic weapon), but then suddenly want to say it's ok to have relatively easy access to fully automatics? What?
I think they are saying that they would allow fully auto if they got everything else that came with it. That's what I'm reading. If they can't get everything that would come with having the fully auto weapons allowed, then they'll take bump stock bans.
|
On May 26 2018 07:43 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. I think this might be one of those times we shouldn't attribute to malice what can easily be explained by ignorance (and desperation). That pisses me off big time though. They are absolutely hypocritical, want to ban bumpstocks (which I actually agree with, there's 0 reason to have a fully automatic weapon), but then suddenly want to say it's ok to have relatively easy access to fully automatics? What?
Mass shooters make up a tiny fraction of gun crimes in the US. The benefits of better background checks and firearms registration outweigh the risk of the small number of people that would seek out an automatic weapon. So why not?
It is the same reason why Mother Who Demand Action doesn’t push to ban assault rifles. They are used in few crimes. Tighter background checks is more effective at lowering gun violence, so that is what they push for.
|
On May 26 2018 07:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:
[quote]
Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him.
End of story.
Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter...
My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians).
[quote]
What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. I'll look it up. Thank you. You can't mix metrics in this case. You can't say a 4.62 per 100k homicide rate is the same as a 137 per 100k knife incident. That's not fair to the argument at hand. Homicides should be compared to homicides. Agree?
You should be comparing crimes committed by a firearm vs crimes committed by a knife then to be equal. Most criminals aren't going to discharge a gun because that would end up in more jail time, just like most people do not open fire with a gun in most self defense cases. Same deal with knives.
|
On May 26 2018 06:36 Jockmcplop wrote:
All I can say, and I'm aware that this point is a bit empty and vague, but I feel the need to say it anyway, is that if 25% of the population wants to be armed so they can be ready when the civil war kicks off, your country is already deep in the shit.
If and when  I think the historical wisdom is on the reverse: trusting your government with a monopoly on effective weapons is utopian fantasy. Power corrupts. Governments tend to expand their role and become less, not more, representative of their citizens interests over time. One useful check on the government presuming the police system will dutifully enact their dictates, no matter how tyrannical they may eventually become, is that they operate on the consent of the governed ... and the governed are armed. We had to prove this once in our history, and it was against some distant parliament and king of yours. I don’t think the same human failings have evolved in the last two hundred years. Conventional wisdom said we fought a war to end all wars, and all presidents must come from the military or politics.
|
On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:On May 25 2018 16:59 PoulsenB wrote:
[quote]
While I'm all for responsible and properly regulated gun ownership, this burglar thing has been boggling my mind as well. Even in Poland we have people advocating widespread access to guns on the basis of "I need to defend my home against burglars", but you basically never hear of cases where burglars entered a home when the owner was inside - usually the criminals strike when people are away on vacation or sth like that. For me it reeks of a kinda wild-west power fantasy (and maybe even insecurity - as Professor Farsworth once said, "who needs courage when you have a gun?"). Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him. End of story. Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter... My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 06:21 Nixer wrote:
[quote]
Fairly certain they're converted into semi-automatic rifles. If they choose to purchase a rifle when they finish their service that is. There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians). On May 25 2018 06:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:
[quote]
The reddit poster you linked even says the military rifles are converted to semi-auto. What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban.
Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument.
It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic.
On May 26 2018 07:54 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 06:36 Jockmcplop wrote:
All I can say, and I'm aware that this point is a bit empty and vague, but I feel the need to say it anyway, is that if 25% of the population wants to be armed so they can be ready when the civil war kicks off, your country is already deep in the shit. If and when I think the historical wisdom is on the reverse: trusting your government with a monopoly on effective weapons is utopian fantasy. Power corrupts. Governments tend to expand their role and become less, not more, representative of their citizens interests over time. One useful check on the government presuming the police system will dutifully enact their dictates, no matter how tyrannical they may eventually become, is that they operate on the consent of the governed ... and the governed are armed. We had to prove this once in our history, and it was against some distant parliament and king of yours. I don’t think the same human failings have evolved in the last two hundred years. Conventional wisdom said we fought a war to end all wars, and all presidents must come from the military or politics.
In theory this is fine. Then you look at the number of police related murders, shootings, and killings of criminals in the US and realize that 'consent' doesn't really have anything to do with it. The presence of an armed population guarantees that a certain section of that population will be fighting a war against the police or government.
|
On May 26 2018 07:55 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:
[quote]
Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him.
End of story.
Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter...
My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians).
[quote]
What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument. It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic.
Considering your own government basically stated themselves that the UK has a knife crime problem, I'm going to say that I'm right and you're wrong.
|
On May 26 2018 07:58 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:55 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:[quote] You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:
[quote]
How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything?
There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument. It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic. Considering your own government basically stated themselves that the UK has a knife crime problem, I'm going to say that I'm right and you're wrong.
You're right to compare homicides by firearm to possession of a sharp instrument?
Ridiculous.
You might want to take a step back and realize that in the eyes of our government, people walking around with weaponry on them is a cause for concern, hence the concern about all the people getting arrested for having weapons.
In your country, no-one is concerned, so no problem, right?
|
What a goverment considers a "problem" is relative. Crime problems in 2018 NYC are not crime problems in 1975 NYC.
|
On May 26 2018 08:00 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:58 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:55 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:
[quote]
edited lel. i retract my statements
i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur.
That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument. It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic. Considering your own government basically stated themselves that the UK has a knife crime problem, I'm going to say that I'm right and you're wrong. You're right to compare homicides by firearm to possession of a sharp instrument? Ridiculous.
If you're arguing that a gun is deadlier than a knife I agree. If you're arguing that the UK doesn't have a knife epidemic problem you'd be wrong, considering your own government has stated so.
On May 26 2018 06:12 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents. But the U.K. is such an upstanding bastion of how to deter crime amirite? On May 26 2018 01:30 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 01:24 travis wrote:
Since we are temporarily on gun control, I will throw out that the strongest (and commonly dismissed argument) for no or extremely limited gun control is protection from authoritarianism. Despite the ridiculous arguments that millions of people make (somehow even some historians), the constitution is pretty clearly written and above that - the writers wrote other essays on their intent when creating the 2nd amendment. It's also common sense.
People love to dismiss this argument, but it's basically an inevitability that if you take away the power of people to fight tyranny, then tyranny will eventually rule.
Kwark made a post a couple weeks ago I actually really respected. He made the common sense statement that people typically don't come out and say. Some deaths due to tragic events are just the price of having the freedom.
If your government has missile armed drones, tanks and planes with big nuclear bombs they have already taken away the power of the people to fight tyranny. What could the American public do to fight tyranny with guns that they couldn't do without guns? Because governments typically don't use those things within urban cities because you'd literally be destroying your own infrastructure and it's immensely bad PR. On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:On May 25 2018 17:28 ShambhalaWar wrote:On May 25 2018 16:59 PoulsenB wrote:On May 25 2018 12:58 Orome wrote:
The military rifles are taken home without ammunition, so that's a pretty misleading statement in the first place.
For all the befuddling American right-wing insistence that any type of gun control is the mother of all evil though, I'm almost equally annoyed by the lazy 'gun control would fix all problems' approach. Appears to me that the problematic culture the US has built around guns runs much deeper than just accessability. I'm all for better forms of gun control, but I can't help feel that the endless and superficial discussions around it prevent questions that are just as important. Why so many Americans on this forum (over the years) have seriously and proudly proclaimed their need and right to shoot any robbers or burglars for example (should said burglars ever appear). While I'm all for responsible and properly regulated gun ownership, this burglar thing has been boggling my mind as well. Even in Poland we have people advocating widespread access to guns on the basis of "I need to defend my home against burglars", but you basically never hear of cases where burglars entered a home when the owner was inside - usually the criminals strike when people are away on vacation or sth like that. For me it reeks of a kinda wild-west power fantasy (and maybe even insecurity - as Professor Farsworth once said, "who needs courage when you have a gun?"). Cool story in the US, another shooting just happened, and there was a guy outside with a gun... who drew his gun and confronted the shooter... then the shooter shot and killed him. End of story. Interesting contrast to the waffle house shooting, where someone without a gun stopped a shooter... My country is too stupid and bought out at the highest levels of power to actually do anything, even when children are getting shot and killed over and over and over again. It's truly fucking pathetic. Here's my suggestion, you remove the republican shills who are bought and payed for from congress, then change the laws... remove the payed for dems as well... but at least they aren't the ones defending all this gun bullshit. You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 08:08 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 06:21 Nixer wrote:On May 25 2018 05:38 superstartran wrote:On May 24 2018 20:54 Jockmcplop wrote:
So we have in Switzerland:
1: The ability of the police to check up on people with automatic weapons
2: Carry/conceal licenses for weapons
3: Criminal records mean you aren't allowed to own weapons, and they can be taken from you
4: Ownership/sale is illegal with exceptions (although from what I have read these are fairly loosely applied)
5: Specific permits to shoot weapons
Superstartran do you think applying some parts of the Swiss system to US law would be a good thing?
If so, which parts would you like to see applied to the US, and which parts wouldn't you?
It looks to me like this is a system that works well in Switzerland, although it has been designed for Switzerland and certainly wouldn't export particularly well. There's a cultural attitude at play where I would see this kind of system as very 'European' in nature. I'm not even sure what I mean by that, I know its vague but its a feeling I have.
However, if more gun control is being considered, America could certainly take some inspiration from these systems and laws. It's not just the system in place here; people don't realize that Switzerland already automatically has 200k-250k fully automatic military issue rifles at any given point in time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass shootings. Alot of this comes down to their culture surrounding firearms, and what the purpose of the firearm is used for. Yes, the system works, but the system only works if the culture and society in general accepts that system. Fairly certain they're converted into semi-automatic rifles. If they choose to purchase a rifle when they finish their service that is. There are currently 160k active duty soldiers, my bad. That still doesn't dispute the fact that there are a significant amount of fully automatic weapons floating around (not including the ones held in the hands of civilians). On May 25 2018 06:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 25 2018 05:38 superstartran wrote:On May 24 2018 20:54 Jockmcplop wrote:
So we have in Switzerland:
1: The ability of the police to check up on people with automatic weapons
2: Carry/conceal licenses for weapons
3: Criminal records mean you aren't allowed to own weapons, and they can be taken from you
4: Ownership/sale is illegal with exceptions (although from what I have read these are fairly loosely applied)
5: Specific permits to shoot weapons
Superstartran do you think applying some parts of the Swiss system to US law would be a good thing?
If so, which parts would you like to see applied to the US, and which parts wouldn't you?
It looks to me like this is a system that works well in Switzerland, although it has been designed for Switzerland and certainly wouldn't export particularly well. There's a cultural attitude at play where I would see this kind of system as very 'European' in nature. I'm not even sure what I mean by that, I know its vague but its a feeling I have.
However, if more gun control is being considered, America could certainly take some inspiration from these systems and laws. It's not just the system in place here; people don't realize that Switzerland already automatically has 200k-250k fully automatic military issue rifles at any given point in time, and yet you don't see any kind of mass shootings. Alot of this comes down to their culture surrounding firearms, and what the purpose of the firearm is used for. Yes, the system works, but the system only works if the culture and society in general accepts that system. The reddit poster you linked even says the military rifles are converted to semi-auto. What part of 'active' duty do you not understand selective reader? How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything? There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. It is a dude on stairs in a video. He might be in switzerland, he might actually have guns, the guns might be fully automatic or not. They might even not be real guns at all. I have no idea, and so far your sources have been horribly shit, so i have no reason to believe some random dude on youtube. I could grab a camera, site myself on a bunch of stairs and say that it is impossible to get any guns in switzerland, and upload that onto youtube right now. That doesn't make any of that true. Similarly with regards to the UK crime statistic you mentioned earlier: Please source that stuff. I have no interest in digging after any of your statistics to see if they are in any way correct or random bullshit some dude invented. You have so far not been the greatest source of information, so please cite your sources.
Just wanted to point out that if you owned firearms, you can easily tell those firearms are real. Airsoft guns don't look like that, and Airsoft guns AFAIK are actually heavily regulated in the EU for some weird reason. But hey, use that Trump defense. It's fake news!
Btw, golden from the guy who purposely cut off the last portion stating you can have fully automatic firearms with a permit. Real golden.
|
On May 26 2018 08:02 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 08:00 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:58 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:55 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:
[quote]
Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since.
Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe.
It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion.
[quote]That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns.
e:
[quote]Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that.
If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow!
Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US?
It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument. It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic. Considering your own government basically stated themselves that the UK has a knife crime problem, I'm going to say that I'm right and you're wrong. You're right to compare homicides by firearm to possession of a sharp instrument? Ridiculous. If you're arguing that a gun is deadlier than a knife I agree. If you're arguing that the UK doesn't have a knife epidemic problem you'd be wrong, considering your own government has stated so.
Read it again. I'm arguing that when you try to make my country look like a violent place by saying "Look how many people got caught carrying knives in the UK! In my country, hardly anyone got shot to death!"
It just doesn't flow as an argument or, in fact, make sense at all.
|
On May 26 2018 08:04 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 08:02 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 08:00 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:58 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:55 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:
[quote]
You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD.
The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc.
All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period.
And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument. It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic. Considering your own government basically stated themselves that the UK has a knife crime problem, I'm going to say that I'm right and you're wrong. You're right to compare homicides by firearm to possession of a sharp instrument? Ridiculous. If you're arguing that a gun is deadlier than a knife I agree. If you're arguing that the UK doesn't have a knife epidemic problem you'd be wrong, considering your own government has stated so. Read it again. I'm arguing that when you try to make my country look like a violent place by saying "Look how many people got caught carrying knives in the UK! In my country, hardly anyone got shot to death!" It just doesn't flow as an argument or, in fact, make sense at all.
The UK statistically has more violent crime then the U.S. so what I stated wouldn't actually be false.
|
United States42663 Posts
On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now?
You.
You just smugly presented evidence showing a rate of 0.0003% as proof of your epidemic. Chicago over had 3x the rate of the UK.
|
I see we have reached the point where math will once again dominate the thread.
|
United States42663 Posts
On May 26 2018 07:58 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:55 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 26 2018 07:36 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 07:33 Plansix wrote:
The problem with the his argument is that he assumes I have specific stances on what guns should or should not be available. Or that I am for or against some types of guns laws over others.
The reality is I will take ANY update to the US gun laws, state or federal. Any change would be preferable to the stale mate. The Swiss gun laws sound awesome. If people can get automatic weapons, but all those other changes get put in place, bring it on. People can have browning machine guns if I get a background check system like the Swiss.
No, I'm saying the vast majority of your side is arguing under false pretenses because you wanted to ban bump stocks before, but suddenly are ok with fully automatic weapons being much more available. On May 26 2018 07:34 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? On May 26 2018 07:22 r.Evo wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 23:37 r.Evo wrote:On May 25 2018 19:52 evilfatsh1t wrote:On May 25 2018 18:07 Danglars wrote:[quote] You'll have to remove the United States citizens that have darn good reasons to question the motives and scopes of the gun control activists and lobby. There's enough of them to unite behind new candidates and activist groups, should somehow the current shills get replaced in mass. I gather that some of these citizens are included in your opener of "My country is too stupid." I cheer and salute the American that stopped a bad guy with a gun by being a good guy with a gun. This NRA video is making the rounds. I think it makes a valuable point as it wraps up towards the end. I hope both sides can move towards mutual understanding and empathy and meet somewhere in the gap. I'm pretty pessimistic at this happening in the short term. https://twitter.com/NRATV/status/999714805333147650 edited lel. i retract my statements i will say that the NRA's analogy of media censorship is comparable to restriction of gun ownership is absolutely retarded. this chain of thought has been discussed to death on this thread already though so no further comments Personally I find both US gun culture abhorrent (massive fan of the Swiss approach there the more I learn about it. I like the idea of a well-regulated militia apparently) while also finding US media culture when it comes to mass shootings abhorrent. Seeing US coverage and German coverage side by side when it came to e.g. the 2016 Munich shooting was an eye-opener for me personally. I've been really damn glad we do things differently over here when it comes to both of these topics ever since. Hard to judge which is actually worse in practice, but when in doubt most nations have genuinely shitty media outlets at least attempting similar coverage while there is no nation with a similar gun culture anywhere on the globe. It's the mixture of seeing guns as amazing for the sake of it and as stuff that is used recreationally and media glorifying mass murderers that creates this absolutely toxic mixture in my opinion. On May 25 2018 23:34 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 09:41 WolfintheSheep wrote:
[quote]
How about you stop being such a selective writer before you start accusing others of anything?
There are not 200k automatic military rifles "floating around" in Switzerland, any more than there are 7000 nukes floating around in the US. But why argue the actual argument when you can just ad homenin non stop? You still haven't addressed my point as to how Switzerland has a significant amount of fully automatic firearms floating around and mass shootings still don't occur. That's because they neither glorify mass murderers nor guns. e: Before r.Evo comes on here and says "NO YOU CAN'T IT'S HARD YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT ALL THIS PAPERWORK" Excuse me? I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If you're supportive of e.g. guns being taken away when crimes pop up in someone's record or the suspicion of domestic violence arises (which means all weapons need to be at least declared, all the way down to soft-airs), if you're cool with ammunition being strictly kept separate at all times and it being extremely heavily regulated when and where these fully automatic weapons can be fired then I think that's great and I fully agree with you with in seeing Switzerland as a great example to follow! Which of the Swiss regulations would you like to see implemented asap in the US? It's all the additional regulations and the attitude towards guns as weapons of war instead of recreational toys or self-defense weapons that results in an overall more healthy gun culture. You do realize the video I just posted is a guy with two fully automatic weapons with silencers and laser sights on them, all which are extremely heavily regulated in the United States of America. Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Guy in the video said he paid about $4000 USD for a fully automatic SD MP5, which in the U.S. because of the fully automatic weapons ban pre-1986ish (IIRC) it's something in the neighborhood of like 35k USD. The Swiss Gun laws would never pass in the U.S; there's no way gun control advocates would allow such easy access to things such as silencers, fully automatic weapons, and laser slights. Any of the gun control advocates here saying that "it would be ok" are bald face lying, because Plainsix and others just previously in this thread wanted to ban bump stocks themselves, so why would they suddenly be ok with fully automatic weapons. That's the real point I'm making; they are being hypocritical, and simply lying about their actual intentions. There's no intention here to actually try and make a healthier gun culture, improve gun control, lower crime rate, etc. All these guys are doing is trying to press for their agenda. Period. And none of that even addresses my actual point, which is that the vast majority of 'mass shooters' had zero records. No criminal history, no mental history, none of those things. They would have STILL had access to weapons, and likely would have had access to more dangerous weapons. That was the original point of me addressing Plainsix; he says "yeah that's fine" except just earlier in this thread he was totally against things like the AR-15, bumpstocks, and other things that he suddenly just agreed to. Just because you have a law, doesn't mean it will stop a bad guy. So let me get this straight: You are against Swiss-style regulations in the US because you believe people who advocate for gun control would be against them? You're genuinely trying to tell us you are against something simply because you believe people you disagree with would be against it? If I put myself in the shoes of for example Plansix I would also argue in favor smaller stuff like banning bump stocks if that's all that's even on the table. I wouldn't believe anyone who argues the "pro-gun" side would ever agree to something as strict as the regulations Switzerland has in place when it comes to firearms or weapons in general. Part of the Swiss regulations is literally taking people's guns away when entries in a federal database occur. It includes any and all weapons, all the way down to soft-airs having to be registered with the state. I'd expect someone who is afraid of "them taking our guns away" to argue anything to avoid getting these types of things on the table, even if it's something nonsensical such as: "I'm against that because people I disagree with would be against that and those who say otherwise must be lying." PS: Your post makes it seem like it's almost impossible to even get one, which is the furthest thing from the truth. Let me quote myself again: I believe I've been very specific in that obtaining e.g. a fully automatic rifle to own it is deliberately comparatively easy in Switzerland (easy compared to e.g. Germany or most EU nations, hard compared to lots of US states), you might have accidentally misread that. If I'm wrong and for example automatic rifles are actually hard to obtain and use in the US then feel free to simply correct me, I don't mind learning something. No, what I'm saying is that those who 'advocate' for Swiss Gun Reforms are arguing for them under a false pretense, because the same people who are advocating for them are the same people who argue against silencers, bump stocks, etc. In 2016/17 there were 215 homicides currently recorded using a sharp instrument, including knives and broken bottles, accounting for 30% of all homicides – a similar number as recorded in 2015/16 (213). 215 homicides with a knife in all of the UK? Some cities in the US has more deaths by summer from guns. And what's the per capita on that number? Per 100k? Or is that total? Because um, that is not a lot at all. Homicide is recorded differently in the UK; it's based on number of convictions not based on whether the person died to a knife or firearm. Look it up. Consider also that the U.S. has a firearm homicide rate of 4.62 per 100,000. London alone on that report had 137 knife crimes per 100,000. I will concede that yes, if a firearm is discharged it's definitely more deadly then a knife. But to act like criminals aren't going to find another tool to commit their crime is hilarious in itself, as the UK has seen a huge surge in knife crimes since the firearm ban. Just wanted to point out that included in the knife crimes you are listing, according to your source, is the crime of possession of an offensive weapon, and this is not even knife crime, but crime involving any sharp instrument. It doesn't really change your point, which is valid, that people will find a weapon to use, but it is disingenuous to compare crimes like possession of a knife to only homicides with a firearm and use that to say the UK has a knife crime epidemic. Considering your own government basically stated themselves that the UK has a knife crime problem, I'm going to say that I'm right and you're wrong.
The UK government stating that "crime" is a "problem" does not, in fact, prove that you are right and that someone else is wrong because nobody was arguing on the "crime is not a problem" side.
|
On May 26 2018 08:06 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2018 07:29 superstartran wrote:On May 26 2018 05:23 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2018 01:43 superstartran wrote:On May 25 2018 13:08 KwarK wrote:
I've missed a few pages here but I'd just like to let superstar know that the UK is not drowning in knife fights. That's just not a thing. Funny, because I'm pretty sure that the U.K's crime rate is actually significantly higher than the U.S. even after you adjust for their definition of violent crime. If we just take it at face value like most of you do with gun statistics (without even readjusting definitions and how each government gathers statistics), you'll find that the U.K. actually has something like 2,000+ violent crimes per 100,000 residents, while the United States has like 466 violent crimes per 100,000 residents For anyone who was curious, his initial claim was that Brits are constantly knifing each other because they don't have guns. I know it wouldn't appear that way because he's doing the thing where he defends a different argument to his own but it was. He's repeating the same thing he did the last few times where he says something idiotic and then flatly denies it and insists that we were talking about something else, but on a forum where the posts are visible. Apparently we were talking about violent crime statistics and comparisons between the UK and the US, and not the epidemic of knife fighting that has, in his head, overtaken the lawns and playgrounds of England. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04304Oh yeah, I'm just making up shit. The UK doesn't have a knife epidemic or anything. Who's the idiot now? You. You just smugly presented evidence showing a rate of 0.0003% as proof of your epidemic. Chicago over had 3x the rate of the UK.
Dat salt.
Nice cherry picking btw. The original argument was whether the UK has a knife epidemic or not. I proved it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
