Who defends themselves with guns?

[gator996]

Originally Posted by The_Graygator

Ah, I see, the "race" card now.

I used that a lot when I was a lib too.

You know, the only real racists are the ones who try to make a racial issue out of something. Here's your medal... be proud.

Just wondering after reading your posts on this thread....


How many people have you actually shot in your life?

How many needed bodybags after running into you?

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

I own a couple of shotguns (used to be duck hunter) and a couple of pistols (given to me by my father), but I will tell you, I spent time in London, and there is something nice about a society that isn't armed. While there is always going to be some crime in a major city like London, it is nice to know no matter what neighborhood you are in, there is almost no possibility that you are going to get shot.

I would give up my guns tomorrow if we could have a society like that here.

To read the British newspapers, London is a violent place. And just saw a video of a jewelry store robbery in central London. It must have been terrifying for the shopkeepers.

Not being allowed to have guns, somehow, with the aid of a steel bar, the (Pakastani ?) family was able to drive the intruder into a man-trap.

Though in the central city area festooned with surveillance cameras, it took police over twenty minutes to arrive.

[HudsonGator]

As I said, there is still crime in London, but people aren't getting shot in London on a daily basis like they are in every major US city.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

As I said, there is still crime in London, but people aren't getting shot in London on a daily basis like they are in every major US city.

A law-abiding citizen in London is probably more likely to be violently accosted, in London, than is a law-abiding citizen in NYC.

[HudsonGator]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

A law-abiding citizen in London is probably more likely to be violently accosted, in London, than is a law-abiding citizen in NYC.

And you base that statement upon what?

I have spent time in both cities, I would take London over NYC every time when it comes to safety.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

And you base that statement upon what?

I have spent time in both cities, I would take London over NYC every time when it comes to safety.

And you base that on what ?

[wygator]

Originally Posted by gator1986

I'm different then most, I hope someone breaks in one day. I got 5 guns hidden throughout my house that need to be put to use. Wouldn't want to kill, but would definitely shoot a knee out.

Wrong.

None of us want to kill, but if you are using a gun on someone, it is because you feel threatened with deadly force.

If you must make the decision to shoot someone, you must shoot to kill. Once you start shooting at someone, you can bet they are going to attempt to kill you. Shooting a knee out won't stop them from trying to shoot you.

Attempting to wing someone in the heat of battle, possibly in the dark, puts you and your family at more risk.

[Dreamliner]

UK violent crime rate higher than US:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk-ha...e-6746864.html

[HudsonGator]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

And you base that on what ?

Admittedly it is anecdotal evidence based upon my own experience, but what is not in dispute is the fact that there are thousands of killings in America every year from guns, at the same time gun violence is almost nonexistent in the UK. That is not subjective belief, that is simple math.

We can argue about which is the better society, but about this there be no argument, our society is exponentially more violent than that found in the UK.

I would really like to know upon what do you base your statement that "[a] law-abiding citizen in London is probably more likely to be violently accosted, in London, than is a law-abiding citizen in NYC."

[wygator]

Why guess? Statistics are available. From a 2009 story:

American and British criminologists have long been puzzled and angered by the fact that Britain seems to have learnt nothing from the experience of New York in successfully reducing crime.

The big drop in virtually all types of crime in New York has generally been attributed to the zero-tolerance policy associated with Mayor Guiliani. Now Britain, far from adopting zero-tolerance, looks like it's adopting a policy of not prosecuting many serious crimes at all. This is the subject of an official Home Office directive to all British police forces. British police have now been told that instead of arresting a range of serious criminals, they can be let off with a caution. The Home Office says offenses that may now be dealt with by a caution include burglary of a shop or office, threatening to kill, actual bodily harm, and possession of Class A drugs such as heroin or cocaine if police decide a caution would be the best approach. Other crimes including common assault, threatening behavior, sex with an underage girl or boy, and car theft should normally be dealt with by a caution, if the offenders admit their guilt but have no criminal record.

London and British crime rates have been increasing for years. Recently total crime rates for London have been estimated at about seven times those of New York for a slightly smaller population and some authorities suggest these figures have been minimized. England and Wales are now accounted by some estimates as the most dangerous places for crime in the developed world.

Even the right to self defense in England has been questioned:

There have been doubts expressed that a right to self-defense still exists in British law. Following one homicidal home burglary Dr. Ian Stephen, an Honorary Lecturer (Forensic Psychology) at Glasgow Caledonian University, told householders:

"If you attack the burglar, or react in an 'over-the-top' manner... you will inevitably end up on the receiving end of a prison sentence that will far outstrip that imposed on the intruder in your own home.... [W]hen individuals are confronted by intruders there are some actions they should follow. Direct contact should be avoided whenever possible. If unavoidable, the victim should adopt a state of active passivity..."

There are also harrowing quotes from Andrew Lloyd Weber and Joan Collins in the full article.

linky

[HudsonGator]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

UK violent crime rate higher than US:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk-ha...e-6746864.html

Nice try, but there is nothing in that article that even remotely supports your argument aside from political rhetoric coming from a member of the conservative party prior to the last parliamentary election. I see no statistics in that article comparing violent crime in the UK to the US. Here’s the entire article you linked in case you would like to read it again.

UK 'has worst violent crime rate in Europe'

02 July 2009

Britain has a higher violent crime rate than the US and any country in Europe, according to the Conservative Party.

Analysis carried out by the Tories on crime figures released by the European Commission also revealed that Britain has the second overall crime rate after Sweden.

The country's murder rate of 1.49 for every 100,000 people ranks it in 13th place, higher than France, Spain and Italy.

Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia have the highest homicide rates in the European Union.

Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: "This is a real damning indictment of this Government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep-rooted social problems in our society, and the knock-on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour."

All rankings were based on the number of crimes committed per 100,000 people, calculated on a three-year average from 2005 to 2007.

Britain had the fifth highest robbery rate in the European Union after Belgium, Spain, France and Portugal, with 164 robberies committed per 100,000 people.

Figures on burglary place the country in fourth, behind Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, but with 304,881 burglaries committed overall, Britain recorded by far the highest number in 2007.

Mr Grayling said: "We're now on our fourth home secretary in this parliament, and all we are getting is a rehash of old initiatives that didn't work the first time round. More than ever, Britain needs a change of direction."

Let's look at real data, shall we?

The UK has 1.2 homicides per 100,000 whereas the U.S. has 5.0 (i.e. over 4 x's higher).

Still think UK is more violent?


http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-...e_2011_web.pdf

[HudsonGator]

Originally Posted by wygator

Why guess? Statistics are available. From a 2009 story:



Even the right to self defense in England has been questioned:



There are also harrowing quotes from Andrew Lloyd Weber and Joan Collins in the full article.

linky

I am not talking about "total crime," I am talking about homicides, and someone in the US is far more likely to be a victim of homicide than someone in the UK.


And btw, quoting from The American Spectator is about on the same level as quoting Fox News; it is not how one wins an argument, rather is betrays one’s own bias.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

Nice try, but there is nothing in that article that even remotely supports your argument aside from political rhetoric coming from a member of the conservative party prior to the last parliamentary election. I see no statistics in that article comparing violent crime in the UK to the US. Here’s the entire article you linked in case you would like to read it again.







Let's look at real data, shall we?

The UK has 1.2 homicides per 100,000 whereas the U.S. has 5.0 (i.e. over 4 x's higher).

Still think UK is more violent?


http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-...e_2011_web.pdf

Yes, because violence extends beyond homicides. So, no, I'm not going against the article.

Look, I too have spent loads of time in the US major cities. But never mind me, I've never known ANYONE who's been shot at in a big city.

Your irrational fear of guns has you unbalanced.

[HudsonGator]

Read the article again. There is nothing in it that even compares violent/non-homicide crime in the U.S. versus the UK. You have not provided anything to support your original point.

Further, as I mentioned before, I own guns and I served in the infantry, I've been around more guns and more deadly types of guns than probably most people on this board, and I don't have an "irrational fear" of them.

My point remains, too many people die in this country from gun violence. That is not an "irrational fear," that is a fact.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

Read the article again. There is nothing in it that even compares violent/non-homicide crime in the U.S. versus the UK. You have not provided anything to support your original point.

Further, as I mentioned before, I own guns and I served in the infantry, I've been around more guns and more deadly types of guns than probably most people on this board, and I don't have an "irrational fear" of them.

My point remains, too many people die in this country from gun violence. That is not an "irrational fear," that is a fact.

*sighs* Another UK more violent than US:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...frica-U-S.html

Now, if you want to retreat to too many people die in this country from gun violence, I agree. For that matter, too many people die in the UK from guns and other implements.

AND, as long as you don't belong to a gang or buy and sell drugs, you're probably HIGHLY unlikely to be shot at in a US city. Last year I checked, there were 9,000 gun homicides in the US, a nation of nearly 315-million.

And since the majority of those are domestic/gang or drug-related, you are many, MANY times more likely to die at the hands of a doctor. Yet, I'll bet you won't stop going to a doctor.

[Juggernautz]

I have an ex-wife(w\ a gun btw), a German Shepherd, a Yorkie & a attack Sun Conyer all to protect me! Who needs a gun??

[HudsonGator]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

*sighs* Another UK more violent than US:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...frica-U-S.html

Now, if you want to retreat to too many people die in this country from gun violence, I agree. For that matter, too many people die in the UK from guns and other implements.

AND, as long as you don't belong to a gang or buy and sell drugs, you're probably HIGHLY unlikely to be shot at in a US city. Last year I checked, there were 9,000 gun homicides in the US, a nation of nearly 315-million.

And since the majority of those are domestic/gang or drug-related, you are many, MANY times more likely to die at the hands of a doctor. Yet, I'll bet you won't stop going to a doctor.

I am amazed you continue to post links to articles from the Daily Mail from right before the last parliamentary election as somehow proving your point. All one has to do is to read the actual article and see how weak your arguments continue to be:

...The figures, compiled by the Tories, are considered the most accurate and up-to-date available.

But criminologists say crime figures can be affected by many factors, including different criminal justice systems and differences in how crime is reported and measured.

In Britain, an affray is considered a violent crime, while in other countries it will only be logged if a person is physically injured....

Get some actual facts if you want to continue to play, otherwise admit your defeat and go home.

[Dreamliner]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

I am amazed you continue to post links to articles from the Daily Mail from right before the last parliamentary election as somehow proving your point. All one has to do is to read the actual article and see how weak your arguments continue to be:





Get some actual facts if you want to continue to play, otherwise admit your defeat and go home.

R-i-g-h-t, because UK violent crime rate plummeted after the last election.

Move to UK or buy a baby blankie.

[HudsonGator]

I guess you give up.

Thanks for playing, we have some nice parting gifts for you back-stage.

Take care now.

[lacuna]

Originally Posted by The_Graygator

Ah, I see, the "race" card now.

I used that a lot when I was a lib too.

You know, the only real racists are the ones who try to make a racial issue out of something. Here's your medal... be proud.

Nice attempt to deflect and sidestep. I'm guessing you don't want to answer the question as to why you thought it necessary to point out the "guy" who frightened you was black?