Post details: Gun control to us DOES mean more than using both hands...

10/25/06

Permalink 07:00:00 am, by Email , 1232 words   English (CA)
Categories: General Shtuff

Gun control to us DOES mean more than using both hands...

Quick Note: Many thanks an a fond fairwell to our previous renter, WomenDiary.net... but it's now time to rent once again! (...and we already have bids!) If interested, click here and through BlogExplosion, rent this old blog and have Sue pimp the heck out of it for you tomorrow!

Spacer

Re: Yesterday's post...

Got some comments via e-mail... wanted to address them.

Yikes!

Everyone has his or her own opinion, and that's fine... but just so everyone knows, Sue and myself do believe in gun control.

In essence, our feelings is that no one in an urban area needs to own or use firearms... and if they must, there should be VERY strict controls on them.

Yes, I'm an oddity... I've owned firearms... I've trained on many types of target and military weapons... I've even won awards for marksmanship... and yet, I don't want to EVER own a rifle or pistol... save my black powder weapons. (Flintlocks.)

It's true that if you make owning a gun a crime, only criminals will own guns... but they already do. About half the firearms used in crimes in Ontario (my home province) were "black market" weapons most likely brought in through the U.S.... but the rest are one's that WERE legally owned and even registered. The thing is, to simply "register" a weapon is NOT truly a control... it's paper work.

Yikes 2!

Control for homeowners should be ABSOLUTE safe storage... I mean, I'd like to see bullets et al stored in locked safe-boxes, weapons stored in one place and firing mechanisms for these weapons stored in another... and yes, I'm a firm believer in trigger-locks.

This would ensure a "stolen" weapon would most likely be absolutely useless... do this, and at least 25% of gun crime dries up.

OH, I can hear it now... "Then the criminals will use knives! Are you gunna make knives illegal?"

Hmmm... at twenty-yards, I'd MUCH rather take my chance against a knife-wielding maniac than a loon 100 yards away with a sniper-sight.

Baker Rifle

Now, this said, I did say I have no issues with flintlocks... after all, I'd LOVE to see that drive-by shooting!

With a Brown Bess (not the one shown... the one shown is my beloved Baker rifle...) for example, it takes about twenty-seconds to load the weapon in ideal circumstances... the weapon itself is about five-feet long... and weighs about ten-pounds... it has a misfire rate of about one in every three or four shots and is semi-accurate to about twenty-yards...

To load and fire a Bess, you need to tip the gun on its butt (the part you put against your shoulder) and shake powder into the barrel. Then you need to "drop" the shot in (roll the round bullet into the barrel after the powder). After this, you need to draw the ramrod out of the gun, a two-step process because of the length, and then ram the ball and powder down. This done, draw out the ramrod, put it back into the musket, bring it up to your under-arm, and then put a little powder into the "pan" (the small metal spoon-like bit near the cock or the hammer that holds the flint). Close the frizzen (the metal bit that covers the pan), pull back the cock, ensuring that the flint is in good shape and in tight, put the musket up to your shoulder, take aim as best as possible, then fire and pray the spark from the flint and frizzen actually ignites the powder in the pan and that's enough to ignite the powder in the barrel.

A REALLY good soldier back in the day was capable of three shots per minute in the field.

...now, let's do this in a moving car.

Moving on...

Yes, I do not believe in the ownership of a gun in an urban area... In certain rural situations (where nature can and might threaten you,) then there's exceptions... but living in a condo in a city? Living in a home in suburbia?

Studly Gun Muffin

In my "rotten youth", I knew many people that made their way in life through nefarious ways... mostly break-and-enters... the first thing they'd take if they could find any were guns... easy to unload, good market for them, and usually poorly stored and an easy thing to grab.

I assure you they did not "re-sell" these weapons to hunters and sportspeople.

Too many people meet senseless ends thanks to guns... many children are killed "playing" with guns they find in their home... many people are "collateral damage" with criminals and gang-bangers... too many people have lost their lives when crazies who stock-pile weapons decide that "Today's The Big Day!" and...

...and I'd point out... the registration is not a good coverall answer. The recent shooter in Montreal used weapons that were all registered properly. Obviously the act of filling out a form was not enough in this case.

I also point out to many of my friends who DO still like guns and believe pretty much everyone should own one that there are many people who felt the same way... right up until a gun plays havoc on their life in some way.

Effectively, if you feel that you like guns and want guns and feel safer with your gun, fine... I disagree... but I live in a city... I have a kid... and I've read one too many stories of violence and "collateral damage" because of a weapon that, when mishandled or handled without care, can kill anyone within yards of the killer.

Guns may not kill people... but people with guns are far more effective killers as sadly proven time and again.

IN MY OPINION, no one (except in rural areas) needs to even consider owning a gun. Losing these weapons will not eliminate gun crime and violence... but it will hurt the abilities for some to get their hands on these weapons... even if it's only 20-25% less, that's 20-25% less kids being killed... that's 20-25% less people getting shot for nothing...

20-25% less worry about my kids getting caught in a cross-fire or being shot for their shoes... or because they "looked at someone funny".

NRA

Sorry if the collectors and "gun enthusiasts" don't like that... but it's how I feel.

So, save my flintlocks, I really don't like firearms.

'Nuff said.

Spacer

The standard last note on the old blog... PLEASE SUPPORT THE DREAM!

This blog is here to help promote a dream that an entire family shares... that dream is to rescue an old London Double-Decker bus.

RLH 3

Please, if you have a few minutes, take some time to find out more about this bus and the kooky dream by clicking here.

This bus is VERY special to myself and the whole family, and any help any person can lend us would be most gratefully accepted.

If you or someone you know might be interested, there's our pixel ad site, HelpCoverTheBus.Com and a PayPal donation button (see the upper-right hand side of the blog) and, of course, a Cafe Press shop for T-Shirts and shtuff!
(...and who doesn't need some shtuff!)

Please help us make this dream a reality and save a piece of history!

We thank you for your support!

Please Note: We are also hoping for help from a public relations/marketing standpoint... If you might be able to assist OR know someone who might be willing to, please click here and read this entry...

Spacer

Comments:

Comment from: Candy Minx [Visitor] · http://gnosticminx.blogspot.com/
I am very seriously supporting gun registry. I realize it doens't stop crime, but it helps to track down ownership and theft. What needs to be in place is a kind of inspector home visit. Guns should be registered and proven when you buy the gun to have training and proof of secure storage.

Right now, the idiot Prime Minister not only wants to alter some human rights associated with women and gays, he wants to abolish the gun registry. How did we land up in Cananda with such a dope? I'd like to think Canadians were a little more intellignet than voting for someone I consider bordering on practicing treason!
PermalinkPermalink 10/25/06 @ 14:13
Comment from: admin [Member] Email · http://www.doubledeckerbuses.org/
Hey Candy Minx! Politics aside... I don't think the gun registry is enough... it's a "form" and a money-grab that's cost more money than it brought in.

My version of controls would be much tighter... making me an enemy of the state in terms of many of my friends!

Like I said, I don't see ANY reason for anyone in an urban area to possess a functional firearm.
PermalinkPermalink 10/25/06 @ 16:03
Comment from: Common Sense [Visitor]
Well, i respect your opinions on gun control. However, it simply doesn't work. If you want a good example of how terribly it works, look at Washington D.C. in the United States. (yes, i live in the U.S.)
Their murder rate is much higher than any other area. The last time I checked, the D.C. muder rate was 200% higher than any state in the U.S. By the way, these are murders commited with firearms. Also, look at Great Brittan, after they banned guns crime started to go up, not down.

As for people in urban areas owning firearms, what if they like to go hunting during the fall??? According to your theory they would have to buy a house out in the wilderness just so they could hunt. The second reason for a person in an urban area to own a firearm is self-defense.
If gun control laws are implimented, then it will be the law abiding citizens that loose their ability to defend themselves. Because I can guarantee you that the murderers won't turn in their guns.

Let me know what you think of my side of the story.
PermalinkPermalink 10/11/07 @ 10:47
Comment from: admin [Member] Email · http://www.doubledeckerbuses.org/
Hello Common Sense... Thanks for bringing decent argument to this and not attacks... it's good to discuss, rotten to flame.

You say my thoughts on restricting hand guns doesn't work... can you tell me where you have found this to be true... because your stats and mine don't jive.

Washington DC has a smaller population base than Toronto... and exponentially more murders with firearms... which ARE prohibited in Canada. Can you show me where more guns in a large urban population was a "better" thing for the health and safety of the population... because Washington was a poor choice.

As for Great Britain, do you understand their crime stats and when/how they "banned" guns... which aren't "banned" as such, but heavily restricted?

Also, my "theory" (which isn't a "theory"... it's an idea...) would permit guns outside an urban setting... hunters could store them in safe hunting lodges.

As for the idea of "self defence", how many people have killed an innocent person in mistaken self defence? How many kids found the pistol dad keeps for self defence and WHOOPS!

"If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns" is a tired and lame-duck argument. According to the Ontario Provincial Police, 37.6% of gun crimes IN ONTARIO CANADA in 2005 were carried out with stolen guns... where do you think the thieves got 'em?

If you believe this means it's okay for everyone to own a gun, then can we all own nuclear weapons? So what if someone breaks in and takes it! I mean, I needed it for self-defence too!

Oh, and my wife's uncle... he lives in the states... and is NOW an advocate of gun control... after he almost blew his own daughter's head off when she wandered downstairs and he thought she was a B&E artist...

Oh, and can you find me a person who went from "Gun Control Advocate" to "Give Guns To Everyone" person? I can cite MANY people that went from NRA member to gun control advocate... and yet, only ONE that went the other way.

To be truthful, I believe that your view ignores "inconvenient facts" in order to support what you want to be true... even if it isn't.

You WANT your gun... but do you NEED it? Do you REALLY believe that EVERYONE should have access to them? Do you REALLY believe that "hunters" need handguns and automatic weapons?
PermalinkPermalink 10/11/07 @ 19:56
Comment from: Common Sense [Visitor]
Hello again admin,
((all of this written responds to something you wrote, so re-read the things you posted in your last entry if you don’t understand some things I am talking about.))
You didn’t read my last entry correctly. I will elaborate on what I said last time. Washington DC has a much higher gun crime rate than anywhere in the US (even though they banned gun ownership) and yet nearly everywhere else in the US allows gun ownership. This was an example of how even though they ban guns, all it does is take guns out of the hands of law biding citizens and doesn’t stop criminals from getting them. Washington DC is an example of how areas where gun ownership is banned has higher gun crime rates than areas that allow gun ownership.


And in your third paragraph you are trying to tell me I was using DC as an example of... and I quote, "Can you show me where more guns in a large urban population was a "better" thing for the health and safety of the population... because Washington was a poor choice"
I was showing that DC has a HIGHER crime rate because of the lack of the right to bear arms.
Because nearly the rest of the country allows gun ownership and as a result they have lower crime rates.

Here is a clear example of what I am talking about. In the year 1987, the state of Florida adopted the "right to carry concealed weapons" law. Now that means law abiding citizens can carry firearms.
Between 1987 and 1996 the homicide rate in Florida went DOWN 36%, the firearm homicide rate went down 37%, and the handgun homicide rate went down 41%. Many other states adopted this policy in the 1990s and their states saw a similar reduction in crime. You can find this info at http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp


On to your next topic of if I understand the fact that Great Britain hasn’t banned guns just put very strict restrictions on them…. Yes I understand this. In my last entry I meant to say…BEGIN TO BAN GUNS… sorry my mistake….and I know they only have restrictions on some guns but many of the restrictions are so strict, it is basically a ban. That is what I meant. Next, I do understand the Great Britain crime stats. And in my last entry I was showing the close correlation with the beginning of the “banning” of guns the crime/robbery rate began to go up…..I will post some info on this as soon as I find the original website I got the info from.


Now I will shortly address your opinion on hunters leaving their guns in their or a friends hunting lodge. That’s the problem, not everyone can afford to have a second house. So why should those hunters who live and work in cities have to buy a second house just to hunt???


Now I am getting to your self defense thing. Fist I will address the kid, accidently killing him scenario you mentioned. In those cases, that is the parents fault not the guns fault. If they have little kids, put it somewhere they can’t get it. And that IS easier than it sounds.
As for your argument of how many people have shot an innocent civilian on accident in self-defense cases??? Let me put it this way, the state of Florida tracked things like this after they adopted the “right to carry” laws. And they didn’t track a single person who killed an innocent civilian after almost 10 years, so they stopped tracking it. So that isn’t a problem at ALL!!! (you can also find this info on the site I mentioned earlier)
Now here is the other side of “Self Defense” cases… and again you can find all this info I list on the website I mentioned above.
1----Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times
2---As of 1998, nationwide, there has been 1 recorded incident in which a permit holder shot someone following a traffic accident. The permit holder was not charged, as the grand jury ruled the shooting was in self-defense.
3----As of 1998, no permit holder has ever shot a police officer. There have been several cases in which a permit holder has protected an officer's life.
These are just a few of the HUGE positives of right to gun ownership and related laws.


Oh, I just read your paragraph about the quote “you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns" is a tired and lame-duck argument…… this argument has been used for a long time because it is true. The majority of illegal guns are guns that are secretly shipped in or bought on the black market. As I read down your writing you seem to be getting emotional. As you said in your first paragraph…make a decent argument and not attacks.


Read back through your own response to my last entry…. I am not even going to bother to respond to your part about nuclear weapons ownership…I never said citizens should own nukes. I am talking about guns. Not nukes, not mortars, not ICBM’s…just guns.
I would greatly appreciate it if you would use facts and not emotions in your entries.
Next you mentioned your uncle or something that lives in the states that nearly blew his daughters head off. Well, maybe he should take a class so he knows how to use a gun…Do I think it would be great for everybody to take a class on proper gun use..Yes I think that would be great…in fact the majority of gun owners handle their weapons excellently.


Next, I don’t know anyone personally that changed from gun control advocate to anti gun control or the other way around. But since many states have voted to allow right to carry laws. There must be quite a few that believe gun control can’t work.


Oh. I love your closing 2 paragraphs. I am honestly laughing. I don’t ignore facts. If you read my previous entry wrong that’s not my fault. Now here’s something to think about,….. Accidental firearm deaths account for only 2.7% of all accidental children deaths. The top 3 are motor vehicles, drownings, and fires. If you want to protect children ban cars not guns right???

Ok, I am almost done; I just have to respond to your entry about do I really need guns??? The answer is yes. And it isn’t protection from a bear or a burglar I am talking about.
I need my gun to protect myself from an oppressive government…no, the US government isn’t oppressive, we have a great government system. But if someone was ever able to grab power and ruin the US constitution and kill all our rights, I guarantee you that dictator couldn’t stop the swarm of US citizens that would take him out.
That is why an oppressive government will never exist in the US. They know US citizens won’t stand for it….And a dictator knows he can’t protect himself from all the citizens. Why do you think Hitler systematically took all the guns from German citizens?


I await your counter-argument…
PermalinkPermalink 10/22/07 @ 14:47
Comment from: admin [Member] Email · http://www.doubledeckerbuses.org/
Hey Common Sense... Okay, before getting started, if bits of this seem comedic... they are... no personal attacks...

Also, to avoid issues, I'm going to be "quoting" you by putting your bits in italics...

"Washington DC has a much higher gun crime rate than anywhere in the US (even though they banned gun ownership) and yet nearly everywhere else in the US allows gun ownership."

What's it like crossing through the border guards into Washington DC? So they search cars and whatnot? I mean, if they banned guns in the city, they must have to stop cars and whatnot coming in from other states, right?

"Washington DC is an example of how areas where gun ownership is banned has higher gun crime rates than areas that allow gun ownership."

Bad border guards are to blame! No donuts for those guys!

"I was showing that DC has a HIGHER crime rate because of the lack of the right to bear arms."

...and lessee...

Population of Washington DC (Metro) is 5.30 million... and there's no border protection from an influx of guns bought from outlying areas... and in 2006, there were 169 homicides in the city...

...which is interesting because BEFORE the "gun ban", in 1991, there were 482 homicides... but I doubt "tough gun laws" are to be congratulated... perhaps the criminals killed themselves off?

ANYWAY...

Population of Toronto, Ontario... metro area... 5.6 million... and with a border that has stopped most guns... but allows long rifles and permitted guns... in 2006 there were 56 homicides.

In 2005, known locally as "The Summer of the Gun" due to the number of gun-related homicides, it was 78.

Population of London, England, metro area... where there is stricter gun control than in Canada... 7.5 million. 204 murders in 2006.

Oh, and violent crime was down in both Toronto and London by an average of 7% between 2005 and 2006 in London and Toronto.

So, in the city with "tough gun laws" but easy access to guns, your chances were about 70% greater of being in a violent crime than Toronto or London...

Now, just for kicks...

Detroit, Michigan... population (metro) of 4.5 million... 2006 murders numbered 186...

In fact, violent crime in the USA is up, overall, by 1.47% on 2005 according to the FBI...

...but guns are safer... after all, look at the stats above.

I also guess, thanks to "New Scotland Yard" for the London stats (via the BBC) on crime, that also tackles how bad violent crime is in Great Britain... which was one of your "points".

"Now I will shortly address your opinion on hunters leaving their guns in their or a friends hunting lodge. That’s the problem, not everyone can afford to have a second house. So why should those hunters who live and work in cities have to buy a second house just to hunt???"

Umm... I don't know about you, but I am a TRAINED marksman... and the gun clubs I've belonged to weren't populated by memberships of "one or two".

Larger "Hunt Clubs" could store weapons SAFELY... and realistically, as stated, more than ONE person could use a club... and since we all buy hunting licenses (RIGHT) and abide by the rules of hunting (RIGHT)... this wouldn't be a hardship for a real hunter.

How many "hunters" can't afford a car or a trip to a rural location to hunt??? What, are they at a garbage dump hunting rats???

"Between 1987 and 1996 the homicide rate in Florida went DOWN 36%, the firearm homicide rate went down 37%, and the handgun homicide rate went down 41%."

You'll be pleased to hear that Governor Bush announced that the murder rate went DOWN AGAIN in 2006 to "only" 881 murders!

...which means, with a population of 16 million, your chances of being murdered this year in Florida (as a state - using per-capita numbers) are only HALF as bad as Washington, D.C... which has tough gun laws... and is not an rural or farming area... areas which are included in the stats for Florida.

Guess what the stats look like on a per-capita basis in say New York State? (I'll give you a hint... Florida's more dangerous in general...)

"Fist I will address the kid, accidently killing him scenario you mentioned. In those cases, that is the parents fault not the guns fault. If they have little kids, put it somewhere they can’t get it."

My kid often gets into my office supplies at home which I try to protect... but I've never had to worry about her killing herself or someone else with a Sharpie.

Can you guarantee that all guns WILL be stored safely??? If not, would you need... oh, I don't know... TOUGH GUN LAWS to make sure they are?

Oh, and thanks to the CIA "FactBook" site, The Wonderful Gun Carrying State of Florida ONLY reported a total of 6,850 cases of gun related "accidents" causing hospitalization. According to the FBI, the annual average of "gun related deaths" by accident are 1,500 when looked at over the last ten years...

I would also remind you of my statistic from The Ontario Provincial Police from 2005... where they say 37.6% of all "gun crimes" were committed with a stolen weapon... stolen from a registered, Canadian owner... and we have gun control.

37.6 out of 100 bullet wounds from the bad guys came courtesy of "The Good Guys" who didn't know how to store their weapon properly.

"Oh, I just read your paragraph about the quote “you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns" is a tired and lame-duck argument…… this argument has been used for a long time because it is true."

Yes, and if you outlaw crack cocaine, only outlaws will have... oh wait, that's true...

...and I'm sure I can introduce you to people that will say that, in the "right hands", crack is fun and fine... and they'll tell you alcohol and tobacco are FAR WORSE than crack!

...the arguments sound familiar to me.

"Read back through your own response to my last entry…. I am not even going to bother to respond to your part about nuclear weapons ownership…I never said citizens should own nukes. I am talking about guns. Not nukes, not mortars, not ICBM’s…just guns. I would greatly appreciate it if you would use facts and not emotions in your entries."

Hmmm...

Tyler Peterson, Cho Seung-hui, Charles Carl Roberts IV, and Matthew Beck... and these aren't the worst... were responsible for the snuffing out of about 60 lives randomly because they could "spray" bullets.

Could they have accomplished this with knives?

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but guns ARE for killing... that is what they were built for, designed for, developed for... and make people VERY effective killers at that!

You're correct that using "nukes" was a bit much... but if the argument (coming up) is that "we" must be armed against the government, shouldn't we have the same firepower?

...or, if you're about to say "The Gun's Enough", then why isn't swords? We could use swords and be done with the guns... I mean, fifty-paces away, I madman with a Claymore (the sword, not the anti-tank mine,) is a little easier to cope with then the guy with the Remington 12 gauge... and the guy with the Minuteman ICBM trumps 'em all!

"Do I think it would be great for everybody to take a class on proper gun use..Yes I think that would be great…in fact the majority of gun owners handle their weapons excellently."

...as a QUALIFIED instructor, that's nonsense. Most people who "buy guns" for protection and even hunting DON'T handle them or know how to use them properly in MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE... and I have a bullet hole (blessedly from a .22) in my right foot to prove it!

...and I still don't want a "gun ban"... but proper controls.

...and looking at the 37.6% of gun crimes in my province done with stolen guns begs the question... how many owners AREN'T looking after their firearms???

"Now here’s something to think about,….. Accidental firearm deaths account for only 2.7% of all accidental children deaths. The top 3 are motor vehicles, drownings, and fires. If you want to protect children ban cars not guns right???"

Cars were built for...?

Guns were built for...?*

Also, that means for every 10,000 kids that die in accidents, 270 die from guns... or about one in five-thousand according to your numbers.

That's not a good stat.

If plastic sporks given out by KFC had as bad a rate, they'd be banned instantly.

* - Oh, and guns were and are not built for "defense". Pepper spray, tasers, and bean-bag propellers are built for defense... guns ARE killing machines built to inflict lethal damage.

"I need my gun to protect myself from an oppressive government…no, the US government isn’t oppressive, we have a great government system. But if someone was ever able to grab power and ruin the US constitution and kill all our rights, I guarantee you that dictator couldn’t stop the swarm of US citizens that would take him out.
That is why an oppressive government will never exist in the US. They know US citizens won’t stand for it….And a dictator knows he can’t protect himself from all the citizens. Why do you think Hitler systematically took all the guns from German citizens?"


You ARE a member of the NRA! :)

"If ah gives up ma gun, sum nasty dictator gunna cum and tell me wutt ta do!"

The only government that tells Canadians what to do, save the one we elect, seems to be American... oh, wait... they're armed. Perhaps you ARE on to something!

Well, since we're using historical "reasons", as a member of a Commonwealth Country, I assure you we have NO intention of re-asserting our God Given Authority over you Republican upstarts and former colonists!

I would also promise NOT to resurrect King George III... but he really WASN'T interested in suppressing America (George wasn't a bad man... that was an admitted lie told by the same guys that drafted the constitution)... so, in historical accuracy, I'll simply promise NOT to resurrect the Conservative eighteenth-century British parliament.

Also, if we need to fall back on the blessed Second Amendment... let's remember the third... which is that same benevolent governments right to post a militia soldier in your home without permission in times of crisis.

So, the oppressive government gives you the right to keep a flintlock in your home (which is what they intended,) to keep them "honest"... but can station an armed soldier in your home if it feels threatened.

Is it me, or do we have a disconnect here???

Oh, and since I live in a country with a form of gun control, I'll just have to goosestep my way to mein Furher because, as obvious, I have no civil rights because I couldn't defend those rights without my God Given Kalashnikov!

I find this argument eerily reminiscent as to what ticked off Timothy McVey...

Okay, I know... very negative... but that's how it comes across.

I refuse to believe that someone as eloquent as yourself would say that ALL people should have a RIGHT to own firearms... and that controls NEED NOT be applied...

...or do you?

Anyway, I can't really keep this up... and although I welcome the rebuttal as I'm sure you'll have stats and factoids and more propaganda from the NRA than I can shake a stick at, I now will retire from this discussion.

Basically, in my eyes promotion and demands to access to weapons built for killing as a "right" is not a good thing...

In your eyes, rolling over and not arming yourself for defence is foolish and those who suggest limiting access are un-American and dangerous as they are obviously "soft"...

...but hey, I'm Canadian... what can I tell you!

That said, if you DO get mean, I'm grabbing my Baker, priming the pan... making ready and...

...and I DO have a reproduction early-nineteenth century RED COAT for re-enacting!!!! EGADS!!! :)
PermalinkPermalink 10/22/07 @ 20:21
Comment from: Common Sense [Visitor] · http://internet
Hey Admin,
(please begin citing where you get your info so I can be sure they are reliable sites)

Before we get started I just want to say I think it is really cool you collect flint locks because those are guns that have some nice wood finishes on them and are real pieces of art. But they don’t really have much to do with this debate…but flintlocks are cool.

Ok, I am going to try to explain this again. The first thing I am going to address is your Hunting lodge storage idea. First of all, the VAST MAJORITY of hunters aren’t members of “gun clubs.” I would be surprised if 5% of hunters are members of gun clubs. And hunters shouldn’t have to become members and pay membership fees just to store their guns. And I know you are going to say, “Well, you don’t have to pay to be a member.” Well, if it became law to store your guns there, they would start charging people to store guns because they are REQUIRED to. Next, if you stored all your guns in a gun lodge, it would be easier, not harder to steal guns. Because now everybody’s guns are in one place. The burglars would come in take the gun safes the guns are stored in, and then they could take a week to cut through the doors and then they would score hundreds of guns not just one or two. Finally, if this “storage law” came into effect, quite a few bogus “storage” places would open up where you give them your guns to store and after they have filled up….whoosh! They disappear with thousands of dollars in guns.

Now to address the first part of your entry. What you said in your first paragraph about keeping guns out of D.C. was something I was going to talk about later, but since you brought it up now….we can discuss it. What you wrote has a good point. And I would like to mention that if the government were to ban gun ownership or heavily restrict it. Guns would still come in from outside the country and then murderers, or robbers would still get their guns. Sure they would have to be more careful about not getting caught…but the laws basically wouldn’t hurt their illegal gun business at all.
Next, you mention the murder rate is lower today than it was one year BEFORE the gun ban…I am looking up those stats at this moment. And you used a poor example. Because between 1990 and 1995 there was a jump in murders…interestingly enough there was an increase in murders in Canada as well during this time. So if you take out that those “odd years” the murder rate basically hasn’t changed. It is basically the same as it was back in the 60’s 70’s and 80’s. In fact it was quite a bit lower during the 60’s.
So basically the gun control laws did nothing to bring down murder. If anything it has risen in the past 20 years. And on a quick note… as you mentioned that the Florida murder rate continues to go down. ((P.S. most of Florida IS large city and not much is farmland…it is either uninhabited swamp or mostly cities…except the panhandle))
((you can find this info at http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm))
On a separate note you mention in your Washington DC argument that the state of New York has a lower murder rate than Florida…I don’t know if you are confused or something but New York has nothing to do with Washington D.C. Washington D.C. isn’t even in the State of New York. It is it’s own “district” with it’s own laws. But New York does also have a “right-to-carry” law.


Now to address your “Border Security” stopping guns from coming into your country. No offense meant here, but the border security hasn’t stopped anything. The gunrunners don’t just use the major highways that go right into Canada (except maybe the stupid ones). They sneak them in and very rarely does the border security stop a smart gunrunner.
And it is funny you should mention the BORDER because the top 10 states that had the highest murder rates…guess what…most of them were on the United States southern border with Mexico…this is not a coincidence….let me give you an example…in one county in California illegal immigrants make up for 60% of the prison population!!! Those are all illegals!!! So if the United States put up a wall and stopped illegals from coming in ((of course I am not talking about stopping all Mexicans coming in, just the illegals…I am fine with anybody that enters the US legally.)) Now guess what…the ten safest states ALL had some sort of right to carry concealed weapons. However, 4 of those states have stricter conceal-carry regulations than the other 6.
(this info can be found at http://www.handgunlaw.us/right-to-carry-history.gif and at http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html ))

Next you mention the murder rates for Ontario and England are lower and you say they went down the past year. First I would like to say that one year doesn’t mean anything really because the very next year they could go back up 7%, it is the long trends that show what is happening. Now go to http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/briefs/b29/b29_e.shtml. Now here…I want you to look at these graphs. Now YOUR Canadian government did this research. First look at the graph for homicide. Yes, I see the United States is the highest. But look at the change in homicide rates after 1991. ((after 1991 is when many states adopted the right to carry concealed weapons law)) It drops of dramatically. Now I know there were other contributing factors but if there was more availability to carry guns the rate should have gone up according to you right??? Then the other graph that has to deal with homicide shows the change in murder rates. Look, the England murder rate increased A LOT!!! Now look at the rate of violent offences. England and whales had the HIGHEST, and if you look at the rate at which this changed, you will notice that they increased dramatically, and the rate of these violent crimes increased slightly in Canada!! Next look at the robbery rates. By 2001 England was the highest. And once again their rate of robbery increased DRAMATICALLY!!! The same is true for aggravated assault. Now if you look at burglary and motor vehicle theft the United States is the lowest. But Canada and England both have strict gun control laws, shouldn’t all of your guy’s crime rates be going down?? In fact nearly all the US rates went down, and nearly all the England rates went up. And basically everything in Canada stayed the same. So at best, gun control does NOTHING. But it hurts more than it does nothing…

Next you mention the gun related accidents in Florida. First of all, most of those accidents were committed by stupid people that don’t know how to handle their gun. So anything short of a total ban on guns wouldn’t do anything to stop these accidents. \

Then you mention your statistic on 37 percent of all gun crimes were committed by people with stolen guns. Well, like I mentioned in my first paragraph, your idea for gun cabins storing guns would only increase the problem.

Next you mention the outlawing guns only outlaws will have guns. This is completely accurate because no criminal is going to hand in his gun. They will just go on murdering.
That is all I am going to say for that.

By the way your arguments about crack cocaine and guns aren’t similar. Because crack is a dangerous drug that hurts you no matter what. But guns only cause harm when in the hands of the stupid or the criminals. By the way 99.9 percent of gun owners DO know how to handle a weapon.

Next you mention some mass murderers and the fact that guns were made to kill. First of all, all those insane mass murderers would have gotten their guns on the black market if guns had been outlawed. That is just a simple fact. Because when someone wants to kill other people, they will always find ways to get their hands on a firearm. And you are right guns are made to kill. But guns can save your life just as easy as end it. But I am going to end on that note because that is kind of a philosophical topic and I am going to go completely on facts.

Ok, now on to your nuke argument. I will dive right into the fact you can’t trust government. Yes, an ICBM is more powerful than any gun. But if a tyrannical dictator took power, it would be easy to shoot and kill someone with a sword charging him. It would also be easy to find any civilian owning a nuke and destroy it. However, a gun can be effective when you are still hidden from the dictator’s protectors and it is also much easier to hide than an ICBM.

Next you talk about hunters not knowing how to handle guns. Since I am not from Canada I can’t speak for your country, but the HUGE MAJORITY of gun owners in the United States do know how to handle a gun. This is proven because you almost never hear of a hunter accidentally shooting someone, except when hunting. And most of those accidents were because the other hunter just wasn’t wearing the required orange so he couldn’t see him. Just the minute number of dumb people that buy guns cause the majority of accidental gun wounds. Just look at the stats I posted in my last entry about the concealed carry permits in Florida. Did it list concealed carriers shooting people…no. And according to your own statistics in your entry… there were about 6,800 gun related accidents in Florida, out of a state population of about 16 million. Now the national average of gun ownership is about 49% of all citizens own at least one gun. So the math comes out to about 7,840,000 citizens owning a gun. Then do the math of 6,800 out of 7,840,000 come to about 8 one-hundredths of one percent of the citizens that own guns made mistakes last year or don’t know how to handle a gun. I don’t know about you but I feel pretty safe. ((I got these stats from http://www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca/pol-leg/res-eval/publications/1997/crime-rpt_e.asp ))

By the way I see you only want strict controls on guns and not a ban, but gun CONTROL doesn’t work either.

Next you say that 2.7% of accidental deaths are caused by gun is a high rate and pretty bad. That is NOTHING!!! In fact if anything it drives home my point that the HUGE majority of gun owners do know how to handle their guns.

Next you go and for some reason mention that guns weren’t built for defense…I am not sure why you mentioned this, I guess because in my previous entry I said some stat that showed how many times people use guns for defense. But you are wrong…the first guns ever invented were used to kill the enemy on the battlefield AND to keep the enemy from getting close enough to put a sword in a soldier’s gut, which is self-defense.

Next you get to my oppressive government part of my entry and say I am a member of the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA…hate to disappoint you…and I AM NOT lying. But just look at history, oppressive governments take citizens guns away because that is one of the only things an oppressive government would have to worry about, its citizens.

Then you go on to accuse my countries government of telling Canadians what to do. This is nothing but a lie. Unless you count the fact that both the U.S. and Canada representatives sit in the same room in the U.N. If the United States really was messing with Canada believe me your government would have started increasing it’s military size or just leaked the info to the press. And seeing as how Canada basically doesn’t have a military, if anything Canada is giving the United States trouble by making us protect your country when wars break out. But I would like to stay away from this subject since it has nothing to do with gun control.

Next, I really hope you were joking when you said you had a “God Given Authority over us Republican upstarts and former colonist.” Because seeing as how the British Government was taxing us and making our laws without us being able to represent ourselves, I would say they forfeited that right don’t you??? And when I say oppressive government I am NOT talking about your stupid King George. Was it unfair that colonists weren’t given representation, yes. Was it the terrible oppressive government I am talking about in my entry…no…..remember keep your emotions out.

Next I don’t know where you came up with the notion that a soldier can quarter himself in our homes during a time of war because of the 3rd amendment, but the 3rd amendment says “No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” So you are wrong…in OUR country, the United States, a soldier can’t barge into my house just because we are at war.

Next you go on some sort of talk that I am calling your country oppressive. Did I ever say that? No I didn’t. I am merely stating that the only effective weapon against an oppressive government that a single individual could own is a gun, and that citizens in a free country should be allowed to own guns.

Next I don’t believe everybody should be allowed to own guns. If you are someone who has committed a felony, or are someone who is mentally disturbed, you shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun. That is why the U.S. has its background check system.

Finally you mention some NRA opinion and other stuff. I would just like to say that NONE of the facts I have listed or the sources I have cited come from the NRA ((just look at my sources)) I meant to do that to show you that I can find this “propaganda as you call it all over all these websites that list FACTS.))

And just so you know I don’t believe that anyone that doesn’t own a gun is foolish and weak. I never said that people who don’t own guns are foolish or weak. I merely believe that if you try to limit citizens to the access of guns, you merely diminish your own rights and privileges.

Sorry for the long entry but you had A LOT of stuff in your last entry.
PermalinkPermalink 10/23/07 @ 20:09
Comment from: admin [Member] Email · http://www.doubledeckerbuses.org/
*Sigh* - Wow. You changed my mind. Guns for everyone!

My sources are the FBI website, CIA Factbook site, yes, I used Wiki, "Crime In DC", and various newpapers... and the BBC and CBC.

...and you're right about OUR border guards... I was talking about the ones stopping cars going into the city of Washington D.C... which is tongue in cheek as I know there are no such things. In other words, guns cross into Washington DC that were purchased in other places... look at the ones used in Virginia Tech... purchased out of state, if memory serves, to get the maximum firepower in the shortest time. (Another high body count where I wonder if it would have been as bad had he used edged weapons...?)

As for numbers, oddly enough, we repeated each other a couple of times... and apparently, 881 murders in a population of 16 million is a triumph... and could only be achieved with looser gun restrictions... so, about 390 murders per year for every 7.5 million people... the same number as that crime-ridden, gangster-driven, everyones-a-dyin' city of London, England... which had 204 murders the same year.

...a touch under cutting the rate of murders to half of those in Florida per capita. So Florida has a VERY close to "Two-For-One" body count on that terrible lawless and violent city in England.

...and you're correct... start liberally selling guns in London and I GUARANTEE you it would be MUCH worse... probably as bad as Florida or worse!

...moving on...

You don't live in Canada... and you would be SHOCKED at how much America does factor into our government policies and decisions. Basically, as our largest trading partner AND a VERY powerful nation whom we share a border, when you sneeze, we BETTER have a hanky. It's the way of the world... and there's an inside joke around with people who follow politics in our country... when a high-ranking official takes a "long walk in the snow" to decide something, the translation is, "Getting information from Washington." Live here for a year, follow the political scene... you'll realise that we NEED to listen to Washington in Canada... or starve in many ways. Again, it was a joke... but seeded in truth. America DOES govern bits of Canada... but it's based on trade, not on threats of violence.

...and historically, taxes were higher under the first American governments than they were under Britain which is why there were almost as many "displaced" Americans as there were British subjects in Upper Canada at the outset of The War of 1812.

“No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

You checked your local laws? Also, who makes the laws? Coulda sworn it was via government procedure.

Canada does have a military... but it pales in comparison to the American military in size (although in every "wargame", we kick butt! Even in the air!!!) but we chose a path of "Peace Keeping"... and America, by NO fault of it's own and thanks to the cold war had to take a path of "Peace Making". We appreciate that our friends would stick up for us... and we HAVE stuck in it with you... including Afghanistan... but admittedly, not Iraq this time. (Last time we were there...) But then again, one has to wonder... was Canada NOT being certain places and being in certain others calculated for bargaining for North America as the greater good???

...and King George wasn't stupid... mad, yes, but not stupid... in fact, my favourite quote from this well known "stupid tyrant" is... "The pride, the glory of Britain and the direct end of it's constitution is political liberty." Yup, the guy was a constitutionalist.

...and guns WEREN'T developed to be offencive killing machines??? Your "historical" track being to keep soldiers back with swords??? Dude, ever hear of archers and longbowmen? They predate musketeers... guns WERE and ARE more effective at killing. This is why they were adopted... and history is REPLEAT with generals and politicians of the times before the matchlock decrying firearms as we decry chemical weapons today.

...and lastly, "whales" swim in the ocean. Wales is a nice country that borders England on the East.

Anyway, to be truthful, your heritage and your persona loves the gun... mine was brought up to respect guns and keep them at arm's length.

You can't convince me that a "weapon" is a good thing to own for every home owner... much as I will never convince you that they are inheritantly dangerous.

Ergo: Pat yourself on the back because I say "YOU WIN!"

It's a hollow victory though... your points didn't reach me... and your facts seem as skewed to me as mine do to you... and I'm conceding defeat based on the fact that I'm tired... and I believe that weapons are bad... and my country DOES control them... and your's doesn't.

My country's unofficially motto is "Peace, Order, and Good Government"... your's is "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness".

Your country's emblems are the eagle, three rebels marching with fife and drum and old glory waving, and Uncle Sam "wanting" me to do my part...

Mine are a police officer (Mountie), vegetation (a maple leaf), and an industrious rodent. (The beaver.)

My country was born out of legislation for a responsible government by lobbying our founding nation through shrewd and sensible political machinations.

Your country was born out of the fire of rebellion.

In my eyes, 2 kids out of 10,000 is too many to warrant what I consider an unnecessary item being carted about by the untrained...

...in your eyes, 200 is "acceptable losses" to safeguard your right.

Do you believe, in your heart of hearts you'll ever convince someone like me that "Guns are Good"?

...especially with the hole in my foot from a kid who didn't understand that you do NOT get up from the prone position and aim a rifle at the instructor to say you have a misfire... thank God I was quick enough to bang the barrel of the rifle down to the ground.

I'm afraid I'll never be convinced... but I will go on record as saying I do know that YOU could be convinced easily... and I pray you do not have to be converted the way it tends to happen to others... or worse yet, in a flurry of bad decisions or accident, you convert someone else.
PermalinkPermalink 10/23/07 @ 20:44
Comment from: Common Sense [Visitor] · http://i don't know
Hi once more,
Just some quick entrys here...

the guy that did the virginia tech shootings went out of state so it would be harder for the authorities to know he purchased them ((because he had already had counceling for emotional issues and a major weapons purchase in state would have immediately shown up))

And also, i realize that England has 1/2 the murder rate that Florida does but also, england doesn't have the illegal immigrant problem we have...yes, many of those people come here to try and spread their gangs they started in Mexico.

And of course the U.S. is going to impact decisions in Canada, and Canada also has some influence on U.S. decisions since they are our closest geographic ally. I was just clairifying you didn't mean a military "bullying." ((by the way i consider you guys to be great friends to my country))

One more thing... about my facts seeming skewed to you and your facts seeming skewed to me...I think that if you think about it neither one of us thought either one of our facts were skewed...JUST LOOK at how many times our facts were the same. I didn't think your facts were skewed, I just asked for your sources because citing sources proves the validity of facts.

But this entry itsn't to debate you. This was an entry to let you know I truly appreciated your side of this argument. And i will tell you why....Because you are one of the few people that can have a discussion about a topic using facts and reality and not just mindless ranting. Even if i don't agree with your view, the only reason I kept coming back here to debate was because you are someone who I can have a real discussion with.

Anyway, it has been a pleasure sir...


P.S. thanks for giving me a victory...lol


one last thing...I am sturdy in my belief about guns...and it CAN'T be changed easily.
PermalinkPermalink 10/24/07 @ 18:21

COMMENTS DISABLED:

COMMENTS DISABLED
COMMENTS DISABLED

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
This blog is called One Old Green Bus. Yup, the bus is green. What colour is the bus?

D O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V. M
Et In Arcadia Ego

IMPORTANT NOTICE:


October 28th, 2009

See the "latest post" on the left here... I've decided to concentrate on other work so this blog is kinda done for me... THANKS kindly to my friends and regular readers... and as you'll note, I am still loitering in the blogsphere... and I'm still online... and I honestly haven't given up hope that we will get our dream bus one day! (We've just gotten REALLY quiet about it...)

My Disclosure Policy For Sponsored Posts

Blog-Gone! Thanks for reading!

As of October 28th, 2009, this blog went inactive... basically, the blogger here has moved on to bigger and better...

Please Note: As of October 28th, 2009, I am not maintaining any of these links...

Looking for RV info? Check out phred Tinseth's Poop Sheets on Phrannie.Org

The Toronto Ghosts and Hauntings Research Society

ParaResearchers

Paranormal Studies and Investigations Canada

Virtually Strange Network

The Paranormal Blog

From The Desk Of...

My Clan - The Carlyles

Please Note: As of October 28th, 2009, I am not maintaining any of these links...

PSICAN Message Board

Outpost Gallifrey

Find-a-Death

BBC News

VERY COOL! Big Green Bus Site

Solar Toronto - University of Toronto Team

Friends

Please Note: As of October 28th, 2009, I am not maintaining any of these links...

Abandoned Stuff

Bill Blunt

Buck Naked Politics

Café at the End of the Universe

Christie St. Martin @ LA Times

The Creative Nerd

Driller's Place

Exhausticated

A Gentleman's Domain

The Gnostic World of Candy Minx

Gone With The Wenns Another double-decker bus dream coming to fruition!

High Strangeness Altoona

The Hot Dog Truck

Hydra

I Can Has Cheezburger

Imaginary Magnitude

Incoherent-ish

Jump in the Ocean

Warren Kinsella

Life At The Edge

Life at Star's Rest

Lucid-Sphere

Mad Gringo

Marketing Whore

Moonlight Becomes Me

Motherhood Metamorphosis

Motivated Motion

Musings of Khlari

Northview Diary

One More Word

Pointless Drivel

RealTalk - Biggus Sissus (My Big Sister)

The Spicy Cauldron

Texas RV Travel: USAer Blog

Travels of Stacey

UltraMantis Black

Utenzi Blog

Wandering Coyote

Live from Waterloo

Waterfalls' Paranormal Life

Weird Cake: Treats from a Bipolar Mind

Window in the Web

Writing in Faith

Yarn Harlot

Yellowdog Granny

Please Note: As of October 28th, 2009, I am not maintaining any of these links...

Canada Blog Friends

d bImBo WiF D tWiSt

The DeSmog Blog

Dumpdiggers

Fear And Loathing - The Gonzo Papers

Stephen Fry

Home & Business Interest

Lance Storm

The Lives and Times of Anthony McCunee

New York Traveller

Planet Gallifrey

Pointless Directives

Raymi the Minx

Reflections of Time

Jim Ross

Stacie's Blog

If you're looking to make a little coin from your blog, I whole heartedly recommend Blogsvertise! They've been EXCELLENT and have paid nicely without issue!

Grokodile Blog Directory - Add Your Blog

Blog Soldiers

iPing-it!

Automotive Blogs -  Blog Catalog Blog Directory

Apparently, I'm a...

B-List Blogger

...is that a good thing?

Matthew Didier's Facebook profile





Because I believe in this...








Communicating with Skype...

My status

E-Mail Me At...


December 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
<< <     
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Search

Misc

XML Feeds

What is RSS?

powered by
b2evolution

Poll

Should we go back to concentrating on and letting folks know how things are going with our bus? (Kinda back to the good ol' days?)

View Results


Yeah, Baby!

D OUOSVAVV M
Didier Sigillum Militum Xpisti





Click here for the...



...blogroll!



Click here for the...



...blogroll!



Click here for the...



...blogroll!



Click here for the...



...blogroll!



Click here for the...



...blogroll!








Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 11

powered by
b2evolution


Above is NOT a sponsored ad... this is here because Mad Gringo
and the folks who look after it are just VERY cool!


Above is NOT a sponsored ad... this is here because a person
involved in the shop is a very kind person who checks
in on the dream! Please visit the site for great fashions!





Et in Arcadia Ego