Gun Control Reduces Crime? Not According the Harvard Law.

[TiredOfLife]

Why is "lowering gun deaths" of itself a good thing if it not a matter of lowering crime? Guns for self defense is specifically about lowering crime - lowering crime committed against the gun owner.

The myth is that it takes shooting someone for a gun to prevent a crime. The mere presence of a gun prevents crime.

In a sense, your response is why there is no reason for us to oppose having guns for ourselves. I am concerned of our safety. Your concern is the safety of others. I don't put the safety of others first at our own endangerment. Why would I?

Guns are for killing things. They have no other purpose. And as I said, it's not about crime. As for who you put first, that is very clear.

 

[Paschendale]

Taking Australia as an example, gun control does not lower crime. But it certainly reduces murders. Crime in Australia went up, but deaths went down. People might have lost a little bit of property, but innocent people are alive because Australia got rid of its guns. So which is more important, property or life?

 

[SMTA]

Such studies assume all deaths are equal and assume we must not allow people to prevent being victims of crime. Such studies and the conclusion take the position of better 1,000 women raped than one rapist killed.

I have posted the DOJ stats many times and it used to be my signature that firearms prevent 500,000 home invasions and 1,000,000 non-drug related felonies PER YEAR.

There is no proof anywhere that shows guns prevent these things.

Show a link to these magical numbers.

Prove it.

 

[joko104]

There is no proof anywhere that shows guns prevent these things.

Show a link to these magical numbers.

Prove it.

Your anti-gun argument on this issue is with the DOJ, not me.

Don't worry, no one is forcing you to have a firearm. If they frighten you or you think having one is dangerous, don't have any. Problem solved.

 

[joko104]

Guns are for killing things. They have no other purpose. And as I said, it's not about crime. As for who you put first, that is very clear.

Guns for self defense are 100% about crime.

 

[TiredOfLife]

Guns for self defense are 100% about crime.

Suns are not about self defense, and neither are cars. You can run a rapist over but that's not its design.

 

[joko104]

Suns are not about self defense, and neither are cars. You can run a rapist over but that's not its design.

Your logic doesn't work. Guns are designed for many usages including self defense. In fact, that is the specific design purpose of nearly all handguns.

 

[TiredOfLife]

Your logic doesn't work. Guns are designed for many usages including self defense. In fact, that is the specific design purpose of nearly all handguns.

No, it isn't. It's a small, portable, easy to carry killing machine. It's a tool for making things no longer alive just like a claw hammer is for pouding in and removing nails. I can defend myself with one but that's not what it's deigned for.

Why are people so in love CC laws? So they can have a gun on them when it's time to "shoot" back. I could carry a small flame thrower and justify the same thing. Guns are killing machines, that's all.

 

[SMTA]

Your anti-gun argument on this issue is with the DOJ, not me.

Don't worry, no one is forcing you to have a firearm. If they frighten you or you think having one is dangerous, don't have any. Problem solved.

Show a link to these magical numbers.

Without it, your logic is fantasy.

 

[SMTA]

No, it isn't. It's a small, portable, easy to carry killing machine. It's a tool for making things no longer alive just like a claw hammer is for pouding in and removing nails. I can defend myself with one but that's not what it's deigned for.

Why are people so in love CC laws? So they can have a gun on them when it's time to "shoot" back. I could carry a small flame thrower and justify the same thing. Guns are killing machines, that's all.

Not easy to use for those who are clueless.

Using one when needed for self defense is why they are carried.

Big hint: that is why police carry them also!

 

[tech30528]

No, it isn't. It's a small, portable, easy to carry killing machine. It's a tool for making things no longer alive just like a claw hammer is for pouding in and removing nails. I can defend myself with one but that's not what it's deigned for.

Why are people so in love CC laws? So they can have a gun on them when it's time to "shoot" back. I could carry a small flame thrower and justify the same thing. Guns are killing machines, that's all.

When I get out of my truck with several thousand dollars in one of those zippered cash bags in my hand, the firearm on my hip says "there is nothing in that bag that is worth your life". I have never fired mine in the direction of a person. I have not had to. I have not interviewed anyone who may have seen it and changed their mind about robbing me because of it.

 

[American]

I've said it a million times, there's a million and one things besides gun availability that affect crime, violence, death, etc. If you want to look at solely guns and nothing else you'll just find yourself running in circles, for example:

If you look at it by state, generally states with the least restrictive gun control laws have more homicides both by gun and not by gun than states with strict gun laws.

But if you look say cities you'll find that they have higher homicide rates than rural counties in general but cities have stricter gun laws than most rural counties.

There's more to it than just weapons, take your heads out of the sands.

Yeah, like for instance the human brain.

 

[TiredOfLife]

Not easy to use for those who are clueless.

Using one when needed for self defense is why they are carried.

Big hint: that is why police carry them also!

They carry them in case they need to shoot someone or shoot back. Why is an unloaded gun useless? Because without bullets it can't what's its designed for, killing things.

What else do cops carry? Phones and radios to make calls, flashlights to see in the dark, handcuffs to restrain people, and guns to kill things and shoot back. Just because you say a screwdriver is for self-defense because you carry one in your back pocket doesn't make it so. It's a tool, just like a gun is but the only reason a gun was ever designed in the first place is because it was better way to kill people than the alternatives.

 

[avery45]

What would the far left like? A complete ban on guns? There has been a complete ban on cocaine, meth, crack, etc. So has there been a drug problem?

 

[TiredOfLife]

When I get out of my truck with several thousand dollars in one of those zippered cash bags in my hand, the firearm on my hip says "there is nothing in that bag that is worth your life". I have never fired mine in the direction of a person. I have not had to. I have not interviewed anyone who may have seen it and changed their mind about robbing me because of it.

You don't rob armed men unless you are better armed. And when you do the entire point is to aim your deadly weapon at them and say my gun is bigger than yours so you will die faster, meaning put yours down. It has only to do with the fact that it kills that makes anyone respect it but if they had a tank pointed at you you would respect that as well. Why, because tanks blow things up and kill people, that's why they were designed. Driving one around town so you feel safe is a rationalization, a big one.

 

[TiredOfLife]

What would the far left like? A complete ban on guns? There has been a complete ban on cocaine, meth, crack, etc. So has there been a drug problem?

Close to a complete ban, on handguns and certain other guns. That way when the police see you with one they know what to do, shoot you without having to bother asking questions. Now were talkin'.

 

[TiredOfLife]

For the gun guys, if you go hunting why do you take a gun? Is it for self-defense? And let's say that I don't own guns, and I do, but I want to defend myself in public so I cover myself in C4 and I hold the trigger button in my hand. Now my bet is, no one will mess with me, at least up close, as long as I am willing to push the button so is my C4 self-defense? And why do we send soldiers into war with guns? Could it be by chance that they are really good for killing people, the ones we call enemies?

 

[avery45]

Actually if you go small game hunting most will take an additional, higher powered gun to defend against larger animals. As far as C4. If I have a gun to defend myself in order to live, I defeat that purpose by killing myself.

 

[Wiseone]

Yeah, like for instance the human brain.

If you just want to be smug about it sure, I don't suppose that you are also of the opinion that all criminology is just worthless junk science because it just boils down to guns and legal availability of them?

 

[Morrigi]

If you just want to be smug about it sure, I don't suppose that you are also of the opinion that all criminology is just worthless junk science because it just boils down to guns and legal availability of them?

Are you here to do anything but insult people?

 

[BretJ]

Guns are for killing things. They have no other purpose. And as I said, it's not about crime. As for who you put first, that is very clear.

Seems you cannot differentiate between justifiable killing and non-justifiable. The difference is intent. My intent is to never be forced to shoot someone unless I am defending my family or myself. But let's use you public safety litmus test for determining if people should have access to things.

Alcohol is a poison and has no compelling purpose other than to alter ones consciousness. In return, it causes more murders, deaths, accidents, rapes, child/spousal abuse and violence than firearms. What is your stance on passing further restrictions on the sale of alcohol. After all, the laws we have are obviously not enough as these things still occur due to abuse. Perhaps limit the amount or strength of alcohol one can purchase. Nobody needs a 24 pack right? Place endorsements on ID cards and drivers licenses that would flag you as an alcoholic, DUI offender, suicide risk or whatever. Require the id be presented for each and every purchase of alcohol and be cross checked with a database to verify the ID. No private serving of alcohol. Seems "reasonable" to me. After all, who would object knowing that giving up a few more freedoms will result in saving far more lives.

 

[BretJ]

For the gun guys, if you go hunting why do you take a gun? Is it for self-defense? And let's say that I don't own guns, and I do, but I want to defend myself in public so I cover myself in C4 and I hold the trigger button in my hand. Now my bet is, no one will mess with me, at least up close, as long as I am willing to push the button so is my C4 self-defense? And why do we send soldiers into war with guns? Could it be by chance that they are really good for killing people, the ones we call enemies?

Again, you make the assumption that killing is inherently a bad thing without understanding the difference between killing and murder.

 

[black_squirrel]

Source


[/FONT]

What do you mean by "according to the Harvard Law"?
Are you suggesting that this is the opinion of the Harvard Law school?

 

[American]

What do you mean by "according to the Harvard Law"?
Are you suggesting that this is the opinion of the Harvard Law school?

What do you mean by "you"?

 

[TurtleDude]

Close to a complete ban, on handguns and certain other guns. That way when the police see you with one they know what to do, shoot you without having to bother asking questions. Now were talkin'.

IF that was how society worked, those who owned guns would be shooting people who created such a society or advocated such laws