I just got felony arrested, not kidding.

harmonium.ro wrote: ^^ I am talking to presumably reasonable people, willing to take some time off their daily routine and discuss various issue just for the sake/fun of it.  That's probably not the case for you. This is a discussion where people have exchanged only arguments before you joined. And speaking of "retarded", the only thing said here that would bring that in mind would be - calling various civilized countries fascist because they ban guns - calling the polite expression of opinion on a public discussion forum "invading one's life". If you can't stand the expression of opinions different to yours, please stay away of public forums. Cheers.

Edited by himtroy - April 29 2010 at 18:43

Dean wrote: [ According to that chart the total number of deaths by firearms in the USA in 2002 was 28,663   If 86% of those were gang-related that means 14% were not gang-related ... or 4,013 deaths

the 86% was for one city, not the whole country

himtroy wrote: What are you talking about?!  I referred to taking guns away from people as invading people's lives, not someone's comment on a message board.

OK, sorry about that.

himtroy wrote: And yes, telling people what they can and can't do is fascist.

There has never been any kind of functional society without any kind of authority telling people what not to do. There were a few anarchic commune experiments in the 19th century but none worked. All functional societies were based on a balance of both individual liberties and authority. Please learn your stuff. And read the word's definition.

himtroy wrote: And yes, telling people what they can and can't do is fascist.  A government being armed heavily with guns telling people they can't own guns is corrupt and fascist in every sense of the word.

Oh my I was living in a Fascist country and I didn't even notice

himtroy wrote: And you're acting like I'm shutting other people's opinions out only because I'm presenting opinions that differ from yours.

Well you aren't shutting anyone out because it's a free forum but calling my opinions retarded because you disagree it's such an awesome thing to do

himtroy wrote: But what you're saying is just way too idealistic and positive.  Yeah, a society with no guns and no violence would be awesome, but thats never going to happen.  It contradicts thousands and thousands of years of human behavior.

You haven't been reading this thread have you? Those societies exist. The only issue we were discussing was whether my suggestion would fit the US context in order to achieve that goal. I agree it doesn't sound good at all, but I didn't hear any better suggestion either.

Atavachron wrote: wow, I bet Slarty never thought he'd see 7 pages of gun debate from a little story about car theft

OP, Slarti in this case, by law is entirely responsible for the contents of the thread, however innocently posted 

But again Alex, at this point in time, how could you achieve it practically in the US?   Pass a law, and watch the good people turn theirs in.  Do you expect the criminals to?

I think for the US, the answer is to let the cops get tough, and let the non-criminals arm. 

It's easy to say, just replicate us in Europe, but you never let the Genie out of the bottle over there.  You give no realistic way to put the Genie back in for the USA. 

himtroy wrote: What country with anywhere near the size of the US has ever successfully had a 100% ban on guns  with any level of success?  None have since the time when guns started being mass produced.  Our government doesn't allow drugs in the country, but they're most certainly there.  Except when it's with guns then all the law abiding citizens won't have guns and the criminals will.  I can't imagine any faster way that we could give criminals all the power without just mailing them all guns.

The size of the USA has little bearing on anything. In terms of population it is equivalent to Europe. land area has little to do with it in terms of population density since most people live in towns and cities that are equivalent in size to most European towns and cities. All European countries (and Canada) have less than 5 deaths per million of population - in the USA it is 29 per million.

Edited by Dean - April 29 2010 at 19:39

himtroy wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: ^^ I am talking to presumably reasonable people, willing to take some time off their daily routine and discuss various issue just for the sake/fun of it.  That's probably not the case for you. This is a discussion where people have exchanged only arguments before you joined. And speaking of "retarded", the only thing said here that would bring that in mind would be - calling various civilized countries fascist because they ban guns - calling the polite expression of opinion on a public discussion forum "invading one's life". If you can't stand the expression of opinions different to yours, please stay away of public forums. Cheers. What are you talking about?!  I referred to taking guns away from people as invading people's lives, not someone's comment on a message board.   And yes, telling people what they can and can't do is fascist.  A government being armed heavily with guns telling people they can't own guns is corrupt and fascist in every sense of the word. And you're acting like I'm shutting other people's opinions out only because I'm presenting opinions that differ from yours. I'm all for doing things very differently from how our government does them, and I don't support it in many areas.  I'm not a violent person in the least, I seldom support wars, and I've never been involved in any serious physical confrontation.  But what you're saying is just way too idealistic and positive.  Yeah, a society with no guns and no violence would be awesome, but thats never going to happen.  It contradicts thousands and thousands of years of human behavior.

First of all, banning guns is not fascist 'in every sense of the word' as it isn't totalitarian. Governments in countries with gun bans don't strive to control every aspect of their subject's lifes, just the nasty bits. With your definition of fascism every single government in the world or even taxes would be fascist. They simply aren't.
 
I agree that it's practically impossible to create a society without a single gun. However, that doesn't mean that following the ideal of a society without guns is a bad thing. It seems to work in Europe, where deaths with guns involved are extremely rare. Above all, I agree with Dean that a gun ban creates a certain culture over the long term, where people simply don't grab a gun when they feel threatened. I was once attacked by a drunk with a knife , kicked the attacker in the balls and ran away and I'm glad that I didn't have a gun with me.


Edited by Zebedee - April 29 2010 at 19:29

Finnforest wrote: But again Alex, at this point in time, how could you achieve it practically in the US?   Pass a law, and watch the good people turn theirs in.  Do you expect the criminals to? I think for the US, the answer is to let the cops get tough, and let the non-criminals arm.  It's easy to say, just replicate us in Europe, but you never let the Genie out of the bottle over there.  You give no realistic way to put the Genie back in for the USA.

I agree with you Jim - it is impossible to undo what has already been done. But when Rob linked to a table that showed that 59 children under the age of 5 died from firearm related injury it just makes me feel inadequate that I can't think of a solution.

Zebedee wrote: ...

Stop that damned fly or I'll effing shoot ya!

^You should be glad that I've only posted once twice in this thread