Ot would we all be safer if everyone were armed?

[faterikcartman]

You’re wrong here. I actually did a study on this at university. I’m going off a long memory here so the numbers are not precise, but close enough.

In 1972 the populations of metro Tokyo and metro New York were roughly the same. In that time NY had about 1,450 homicides in a year. Tokyo had two. Tokyo had strict gun control laws. When gun murders were removed it still left about 800 murders by beatings and knives.

Clearly, the problem wasn’t guns, but that people in NYC tended to kill one another whilst people in Tokyo did not.

An interesting side point was that gun violence in television was often blamed. But people in Japan had wild samurai themed violence on television. Regardless, it didn’t inspire them to pick up their knives and cut people.

Also, in response to your last point I believe most violent crime rates in Britain are higher than ours now. There has been almost an epidemic of violent knife crime in recent years.

In Switzerland, however, unless they’ve just recently changed the rule, almost every home with a man it it had a fully automatic assault rifle (we’re generally semi-automatic here in the USA) and ammunition. Yet violent crime is very rare in Switzerland.

The instrument is not the issue.

Edit: regarding Germany, as above, you simply substantiate by including other crime statistics that the problem isn’t the gun. The problem is Americans are more violent against their fellow citizens than Germans.

Also, we lack the greater homogeneity of places like Japan, Germany, and Switzerland. I know we’re always told — on the news, in school, by politicians — that diversity isn’t a fault, it’s a feature, but nowhere on earth has diversity worked out well rather than leading to problems. That’s not opinion, study the world and you’ll find it is what it is.

[quote=captcha]
Here is a gun control success story.

http://www.davekopel.com/2a/lawrev/japanese_gun_control.htm

Tokyo is the safest major city in the world. Only 59,000 licensed gun owners live in Tokyo.[25] Per one million inhabitants, Tokyo has 40 reported muggings a year; New York has 11,000.[26] The handgun murder rate is at least 200 times higher in America than Japan.[27] The official homicide rate in Japan in 1988 was 1.2 homicide cases per 100,000 population, while in America it was 8.4 homocide cases per 100,000.[28]

Robbery is almost as rare as murder. Indeed, armed robbery and murder are both so rare that they usually make the national news, regardless of where they occur.[29] Japan’s robbery rate is 1.4 per 100,000 inhabitants. The reported American rate is 220.9.[30] People walk anywhere in Japan at night, and carry large sums of cash.[31]

Germany has fairly strict in US terms, but relatively common gun law by European standards. Its population is more than 1/4 of US population.

Murders with firearms are 3% of US number.
Prisoner population is 3.5% of that in US.
Rapes – 9% of US #.
Robberies – 14%.
Car theft – 7%.

But it does have higher software privacy rate.

Now you show me a modern western democracy with stricter gun laws and higher crime rate than the U.S.[/quote]

[faterikcartman]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=CONCHO][quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I agree 100% Brian. Fortunately we can go to Mexico to experience life in a place where firearms are illegal. I am so frightened from this horror in Tucson that I am fleeing to the safety of Tijuana. Guns are illegal there so I won’t have to worry about a crazed psychotic shooting me at the Safeway. The next time I will post it will be en Español. Vaya con Dios, Amigos![/quote]

How about instead of fighting over whether guns should be legal or illegal we should ask ourselves

(1) Why is it so hard to track guns and Ammo?
(2) Why is there no electronic national gun database to track guns used in crimes?
(3) Why do we need to keep semi-automatic weapons freely accessible? what rational purpose does an AK-47 serve in our society? (and please don’t tell me BS about private militias – govt. has tanks for yout puny AK-47s.)[/quote]

So you’re saying local militias need tanks?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=CONCHO][quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I agree 100% Brian. Fortunately we can go to Mexico to experience life in a place where firearms are illegal. I am so frightened from this horror in Tucson that I am fleeing to the safety of Tijuana. Guns are illegal there so I won’t have to worry about a crazed psychotic shooting me at the Safeway. The next time I will post it will be en Español. Vaya con Dios, Amigos![/quote]

How about instead of fighting over whether guns should be legal or illegal we should ask ourselves

(1) Why is it so hard to track guns and Ammo?
(2) Why is there no electronic national gun database to track guns used in crimes?
(3) Why do we need to keep semi-automatic weapons freely accessible? what rational purpose does an AK-47 serve in our society? (and please don’t tell me BS about private militias – govt. has tanks for yout puny AK-47s.)[/quote]

So you’re saying local militias need tanks?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=CONCHO][quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I agree 100% Brian. Fortunately we can go to Mexico to experience life in a place where firearms are illegal. I am so frightened from this horror in Tucson that I am fleeing to the safety of Tijuana. Guns are illegal there so I won’t have to worry about a crazed psychotic shooting me at the Safeway. The next time I will post it will be en Español. Vaya con Dios, Amigos![/quote]

How about instead of fighting over whether guns should be legal or illegal we should ask ourselves

(1) Why is it so hard to track guns and Ammo?
(2) Why is there no electronic national gun database to track guns used in crimes?
(3) Why do we need to keep semi-automatic weapons freely accessible? what rational purpose does an AK-47 serve in our society? (and please don’t tell me BS about private militias – govt. has tanks for yout puny AK-47s.)[/quote]

So you’re saying local militias need tanks?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=CONCHO][quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I agree 100% Brian. Fortunately we can go to Mexico to experience life in a place where firearms are illegal. I am so frightened from this horror in Tucson that I am fleeing to the safety of Tijuana. Guns are illegal there so I won’t have to worry about a crazed psychotic shooting me at the Safeway. The next time I will post it will be en Español. Vaya con Dios, Amigos![/quote]

How about instead of fighting over whether guns should be legal or illegal we should ask ourselves

(1) Why is it so hard to track guns and Ammo?
(2) Why is there no electronic national gun database to track guns used in crimes?
(3) Why do we need to keep semi-automatic weapons freely accessible? what rational purpose does an AK-47 serve in our society? (and please don’t tell me BS about private militias – govt. has tanks for yout puny AK-47s.)[/quote]

So you’re saying local militias need tanks?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=CONCHO][quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I agree 100% Brian. Fortunately we can go to Mexico to experience life in a place where firearms are illegal. I am so frightened from this horror in Tucson that I am fleeing to the safety of Tijuana. Guns are illegal there so I won’t have to worry about a crazed psychotic shooting me at the Safeway. The next time I will post it will be en Español. Vaya con Dios, Amigos![/quote]

How about instead of fighting over whether guns should be legal or illegal we should ask ourselves

(1) Why is it so hard to track guns and Ammo?
(2) Why is there no electronic national gun database to track guns used in crimes?
(3) Why do we need to keep semi-automatic weapons freely accessible? what rational purpose does an AK-47 serve in our society? (and please don’t tell me BS about private militias – govt. has tanks for yout puny AK-47s.)[/quote]

So you’re saying local militias need tanks?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I would be safer because chances are I could kick your arse with my bare hands. I’m a bad man.

But would the weak and women be safer? No, they would go back to being the victims they historically were before guns.

Does no one study history anymore, or has tree-hugging simply replaced it in schools?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I would be safer because chances are I could kick your arse with my bare hands. I’m a bad man.

But would the weak and women be safer? No, they would go back to being the victims they historically were before guns.

Does no one study history anymore, or has tree-hugging simply replaced it in schools?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I would be safer because chances are I could kick your arse with my bare hands. I’m a bad man.

But would the weak and women be safer? No, they would go back to being the victims they historically were before guns.

Does no one study history anymore, or has tree-hugging simply replaced it in schools?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I would be safer because chances are I could kick your arse with my bare hands. I’m a bad man.

But would the weak and women be safer? No, they would go back to being the victims they historically were before guns.

Does no one study history anymore, or has tree-hugging simply replaced it in schools?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=briansd1]How about asking if we would be safer if nobody was armed?

Yes, we would be safer, IMO.[/quote]

I would be safer because chances are I could kick your arse with my bare hands. I’m a bad man.

But would the weak and women be safer? No, they would go back to being the victims they historically were before guns.

Does no one study history anymore, or has tree-hugging simply replaced it in schools?

[faterikcartman]

[quote=Arraya][quote=faterikcartman]
Those who refuse to live by the sword are doomed to die at the hands of those that do.
[/quote]

Jesus could not have said it better. Oh wait….Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.[/quote]

Peter don’t be rash. Don’t take up the sword wrongly and foolishly. He didn’t tell Peter to throw the sword away, rather, but to put it back in its place: at his side. And why would it be at his side? Because He had just ordered the desciples to arm themselves to protect their lives. But NOT the life of Jesus, which would have only served to defeat His plan. So “Peter, this is not the right time to fight”.

Dude, in the Bible God says to get a sidearm: Luke 22:36: “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

[faterikcartman]

[quote=Arraya][quote=faterikcartman]
Those who refuse to live by the sword are doomed to die at the hands of those that do.
[/quote]

Jesus could not have said it better. Oh wait….Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.[/quote]

Peter don’t be rash. Don’t take up the sword wrongly and foolishly. He didn’t tell Peter to throw the sword away, rather, but to put it back in its place: at his side. And why would it be at his side? Because He had just ordered the desciples to arm themselves to protect their lives. But NOT the life of Jesus, which would have only served to defeat His plan. So “Peter, this is not the right time to fight”.

Dude, in the Bible God says to get a sidearm: Luke 22:36: “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

[faterikcartman]

[quote=Arraya][quote=faterikcartman]
Those who refuse to live by the sword are doomed to die at the hands of those that do.
[/quote]

Jesus could not have said it better. Oh wait….Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.[/quote]

Peter don’t be rash. Don’t take up the sword wrongly and foolishly. He didn’t tell Peter to throw the sword away, rather, but to put it back in its place: at his side. And why would it be at his side? Because He had just ordered the desciples to arm themselves to protect their lives. But NOT the life of Jesus, which would have only served to defeat His plan. So “Peter, this is not the right time to fight”.

Dude, in the Bible God says to get a sidearm: Luke 22:36: “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

[faterikcartman]

[quote=Arraya][quote=faterikcartman]
Those who refuse to live by the sword are doomed to die at the hands of those that do.
[/quote]

Jesus could not have said it better. Oh wait….Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.[/quote]

Peter don’t be rash. Don’t take up the sword wrongly and foolishly. He didn’t tell Peter to throw the sword away, rather, but to put it back in its place: at his side. And why would it be at his side? Because He had just ordered the desciples to arm themselves to protect their lives. But NOT the life of Jesus, which would have only served to defeat His plan. So “Peter, this is not the right time to fight”.

Dude, in the Bible God says to get a sidearm: Luke 22:36: “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

[Author]

Posts