<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 5 2004, 08:22 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 5 2004, 08:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If there is one thing history has taught us, no empire or government lasts forever. How does not being at all prepared for dictatorship help the cause of liberty? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I don't see people preparing for an alien invasion, for the reason that it's extreamly unlikely. Same with the US turning into a dictatorship; I really can't see how you could warp the current US into a despotic regime. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Lets say nukes hit LA, Chicago, NYC, and Philadelphia. Its mass chaos.
The military is called in to restore order, Congress passes legislation granting emergency power to the president. Welcome to despotism.
A modern version of the foundation of Nazi Germany. Weimer Republic deals with a huge crisis (economic depression and political strife. Hitler gains power, Reichstag burns down (aka, government burns down). Hitler is granted emergency powers.
<!--QuoteBegin--GreyPaws+Jan 5 2004, 09:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (GreyPaws @ Jan 5 2004, 09:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Were you being serious about educating the older kids and spouse about the proper and safe use of firearms? I don’t see many people advocating that point of view, although I myself am strongly for it. I feel education is the best solution to this problem. Not bans. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Absolutely serious. One thing years in the Infantry taught me was the absolute importance of safe weapons handling. even if you do not own a weapon it's a good idea to go through a familiarization and safe-handling course. The same way it's a good idea to learn basic car troubleshooting or a cooking class: because you just never know when it might save your butt.
The famous (and utterly urban mythological) quote is:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Interviewer: "So, LTG Reinwald, what are you going to do with these young boys on their adventure holiday?"
LTG Reinwald: "We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and shooting."
Interviewer: "Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?"
LTG Reinwald: "I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the range."
Interviewer: "Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?"
LTG Reinwald: "I don't see how, we will be teaching them proper range discipline before they even touch a firearm."
Interviewer: "But you're equipping them to become violent killers."
LTG Reinwald: "Well, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?" <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
AS for Ryo and
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Well I don't see people preparing for an alien invasion, for the reason that it's extreamly unlikely. Same with the US turning into a dictatorship; I really can't see how you could warp the current US into a despotic regime. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> While a US dictatorship is unlikely, it's certainly more likely than alien invasion. There are endless thousands of dictatorships paved with roads made of 'it can't happen here' thoughts. Go read about the end of the Roman republic - a senate hundreds of years old, suddenly replaced by dictators and oligarchs. You can say it can't happen all you want, but history does not support your argument.
And fortunately for us, allowing our citizens to remain legally armed also handles the alien invasion risk quite well! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
MonsE, that little parable you just shared with us is probably the most convincing arguement made in this entire thread. Not necissarily most accurate or forceful, but it has a lot of, " (long silence)... I guess you have a point," virtue.
<!--QuoteBegin--Bosnian+Jan 3 2004, 11:35 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bosnian @ Jan 3 2004, 11:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Edit: Something is telling my intoxicated senses that this has already happened. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Have you seen either of these articles? <a href='http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm</a> <a href='http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp</a> December 1st 2003 the second amendment was gone....
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->While a US dictatorship is unlikely, it's certainly more likely than alien invasion. There are endless thousands of dictatorships paved with roads made of 'it can't happen here' thoughts. Go read about the end of the Roman republic - a senate hundreds of years old, suddenly replaced by dictators and oligarchs. You can say it can't happen all you want, but history does not support your argument.
Perhaps I'll rephrase that. It's true that a US dictatorship could come about. But here's the interesting part: it would only come about if the populace supported it.
Looking at your Roman example, the Roman people put dictators into power in times of crisis; they saw it as a nessessary measure. It was expected that these men would relinquish their power peaceably when the time came, and generally they did. What caused the downfall of the Roman Republic however was the march of Julius Caesar on Rome with his armies. Some time before Caeser, the requirements for being able to join the military were relaxed; previously, a man had to own a certain amount of land. The influx of financially poor recruits into the army had a big impact: these men became extreamly loyal to their generals as their generals gave them shares of plunder and booty. Caesar was incredibly popular amongst his men and thus when he wanted ultimate power, he was able to convince his soldiers to march on Rome and install him as a dictator.
Now Monse. You were a Marine. Do you honestly believe that if the general in command of the Marine Corps ordered the Marines to go to Washington and overthrow the democratically elected government of the United States? That could only occur if the soldiers, and by extension the American people, wanted this to happen. Hence we come back to my original point: the dictatorship could only come about with the support of the American people. And if it did come about in such circumstance, the "people" won't want to overthrow it. They'll believe it is right.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Communists used their connections in the military to gain their status. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually that's incorrect. Castro in Cuba enjoyed widespread support amongst the populace when he deposed the dictator Batista, the Chinese Communists had the support of most of China when they drove Chiang Kai Shek offshore to Taiwan, Ho Chi Min and the Vietnamese communists had widespread support amongst the Vietnamese people, the Bolsheviks probably had the least support but even they were able to draw on the support of large numbers of people. Whilst certainly defections from military areas helped Communist causes around the globe, the support of the populace as a whole remained very important.
Besides, because the US military is composed of volunteer American citizens, gaining support amongst the US military would be just the same as gaining support amongst the general population, as the military is part of the population.
Go buy or borrow a copy of <a href='http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/9997412427/qid=1073400728//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i0_xgl14/103-7043524-6331044?v=glance&s=books&n=507846#product-details' target='_blank'>It Can't Happen Here</a>, by Sinclair Lewis. Read it and get back to me. Anything is possible Ryo, even here in the USA.
And you're quite out of step with most of our European posters. They already think we <b>ARE</b> a dictatorship! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
UZiEight inches of C4 between the legs.Join Date: 2003-02-20Member: 13767Members
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 6 2004, 02:08 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 6 2004, 02:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Communists used their connections in the military to gain their status. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually that's incorrect. Castro in Cuba enjoyed widespread support amongst the populace when he deposed the dictator Batista, the Chinese Communists had the support of most of China when they drove Chiang Kai Shek offshore to Taiwan, Ho Chi Min and the Vietnamese communists had widespread support amongst the Vietnamese people, the Bolsheviks probably had the least support but even they were able to draw on the support of large numbers of people. Whilst certainly defections from military areas helped Communist causes around the globe, the support of the populace as a whole remained very important.
Besides, because the US military is composed of volunteer American citizens, gaining support amongst the US military would be just the same as gaining support amongst the general population, as the military is part of the population. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I was specifically talking about the soviets and yes Castro was popular during his rise to power INFACT we did support him in his ousting of Butista
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Then he came out be a fricken communist. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because of, I might add, the United States. Che Guevara was a socialist through and through but Castro was always dead keen on democracy and wanted a deomcratic state established in Cuba after Butista was gone. However, the US was very keen on Butista and were quite annoyed when Castro overthrew him and seized all of the US-owned commercial infrastructure in Cuba. The move to take back all of these industries was motivated by the fact that Castro didn't want his country to be effectively controlled by the US, just as it had been since 1898. So when Castro went to the US offering to start up a democratic government in Cuba and requesting US assisstance, the US wouldn't have any part of it and slapped an embargo on Cuba. Castro had no choice but to turn to someone else for badly needed economic assisstance, and the only people willing were the Soviets, obstensibly for their own political ends. Naturally, the Soviets wanted Che's socialist style government, and Castro was forced to comply.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And you're quite out of step with most of our European posters. They already think we ARE a dictatorship! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ruled by a man who didn't recieve a majority of votes? Sounds like a dictatorship to me! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Eclipce+Jan 6 2004, 12:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Eclipce @ Jan 6 2004, 12:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Bosnian+Jan 3 2004, 11:35 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bosnian @ Jan 3 2004, 11:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Edit: Something is telling my intoxicated senses that this has already happened. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Have you seen either of these articles? <a href='http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm</a> <a href='http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp</a> December 1st 2003 the second amendment was gone.... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> GG USA!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"I know 'the gun solution' (political assassination, open rebellion, etc.) is fraught with peril and inadequate and morally complex and legally illegal. But, what is left? When we peacefully claim our birthrights, peacefully pursue a lawsuit to the U.S. Supreme Court and are stiff-armed while we point to what is written in the Constitution, we are mocked, scorned, ridiculed, rebuffed, ignored, dismissed, and rejected...
"(I)t is not about guns. It never was about guns. It is really about this: 1) liberty; 2) ordinary citizens retaining a legally enforceable right to retain the most efficient, pragmatic means to enforce the rest of their rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution—privately owned, registered or unregistered, firearms; 3) holding government accountable; 4) keeping government from indefinitely blowing through Constitutional red lights, violating the Constitution’s commands; 5) forcing government to wear its Constitutional collar, connected to a Constitutional chain, staked firmly into the bedrock of Constitutional law.
"Now, when government slips that Constitutional collar and refuses to put it back on and wear it compliantly and honor the Constitution’s commands, with the judiciary’s blessings, what then?
"How does one make a snarly, robust, active, gargantuan government wear a collar it does not want to wear? How does one get close to the beast’s teeth and claws to put on that collar and survive?...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
BlakHolez -
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->These atrocities happened in the UK and we banned guns. Result? It's never happened again ("But there is no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it and not having a gun and not shooting someone with it, and you would be a fool and a Communist to make one" - Bill Hicks). It's called valuing human life, I think dead children is a good reason to give something up but it appears other people don't.
Someone please man up and admit the only reason you have a gun in your wardrobe is because it lends a sense of importance to your insecure, paranoid, insular, xenophobic little life.
Rant over, please mark all replies "Right To Bear Arms" or "I would like to kill someone because..."
Flame bait will be welcomed, lets see if anyone can postulate a better arguement than "It's my right.." In some countries a man has the right to rape his wife, anyone like to defend that?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you knew ANYTHING about the history involving UK and it's ban on guns, you'd know that after the ban on guns was in place, crime rates SOARED afterwards... congrats on killing your own argument! I'm glad you knew sub-conciously that you were wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you knew ANYTHING about the history involving UK and it's ban on guns, you'd know that after the ban on guns was in place, crime rates SOARED afterwards... congrats on killing your own argument! I'm glad you knew sub-conciously that you were wrong. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So explain to me why crime rates in Australia did not "soar" when the government banned most guns following the Port Arthur massacre?
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 6 2004, 09:52 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 6 2004, 09:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you knew ANYTHING about the history involving UK and it's ban on guns, you'd know that after the ban on guns was in place, crime rates SOARED afterwards... congrats on killing your own argument! I'm glad you knew sub-conciously that you were wrong. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So explain to me why crime rates in Australia did not "soar" when the government banned most guns following the Port Arthur massacre? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I do not know the history surrounding that incident - nor do I care.
However, I do know you are missing the point:
Do you <b>honestly</b> think a gun ban would have prevented the Port Arthur massacre?
Don't be naive. Laws only affect those who already obeyed it in the first place, and most likely obey'ed societies norms and taboo's (such as killing others is bad).
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Do you honestly think a gun ban would have prevented the Port Arthur massacre? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes I do. Getting a semi-automatic weapon is a lot harder to do illegally, and there's no guareentee that the man in question, Martin Bryant, would have been able to find one. Yes the guy was unstable but when a gun is easy to obtain, it's a lot easier to carry out unstable thoughts. There hasn't been a massacre since most guns were banned and much tighter guns laws introduced. Heck the closest thing was a student at a university in Melbourne who tried to shoot his lecturer with a pistol and killed 2 students.
There isn't any reason for someone in Australia to own a semi-automatic weapon. Shotguns have a role for farmers, and some sportsmen use rifles or pistols. But the average Joe Citizen has no need for a gun and I sleep a lot easier at night knowing that my neighbours don't own guns.
Since 1996, when the Port Arthur shooting occured, Australia has had no massacres. In fact, <a href='http://www.guncontrol.org.au/index.php?article=32' target='_blank'>as this site points out</a>, crime went down after the laws went in. You can check all the facts and figures if you want. The simple fact is though that losing guns did not cause more crime in Australia.
Even snopes discredits the legend that Australia suffered a crime wave following the 1996 massacre.
Now look at America. Just about everyone has guns. <a href='http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/' target='_blank'>So why do you still have heaps of crime?</a> . Arn't guns supposed to protect people? That doesn't seem to be the case at all. Instead, despite guns in every section of American society, crime rates remain high and your prisons remain full to bursting. Guns arn't preventing crime.
But of course you're going to say that if guns were banned, crime would skyrocket. It didn't happen here. Why do you think it would happen there?
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 6 2004, 11:53 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 6 2004, 11:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Since 1996, when the Port Arthur shooting occured, Australia has had no massacres. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> How many gun-based massacres had there been before that? Not something they tend to teach over here. Australia is a word in a spelling bee for 8 year olds and that's where the lessons end. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->How many gun-based massacres had there been before that? Not something they tend to teach over here. Australia is a word in a spelling bee for 8 year olds and that's where the lessons end. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh come now! It should be simple for a child to spell "51st State" <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
I can't recall any massacres before that (except of course the massacres of Aboriginal peoples, but that's more of a differant topic). However, the idea was that it happening once was one time too many. The Australian people supported the gun legislation (they voted the guy who implimented it, John Howard, back into office twice), and we have no desire to see such a terrible event happen ever again. And it hasn't.
Yes it could just be a giant co-incidence. But better safe than sorry.
Code9Bored and running out of ammunition.Join Date: 2003-11-29Member: 23740Members
"But the average Joe Citizen has no need for a gun and I sleep a lot easier at night knowing that my neighbours don't own guns. "
That's subjective. Average PRT (Police Response Time) where I am located is over an hour...which to be fair, is quite good, considering its a 43 minute trip from here to there (and only the city limits in that case!) at 70 miles an hour. But then, knowing what everyone around you does or does not need at any given moment, you already factored that in didn't you? I am not a farmer. I do not hunt for sport. I punch holes in paper most of the time. (Which some consider a sport. I do it becuase it's simply fun as heck.) I also have met and spoken to a few local officers, and came to the conclusion that I am being protected by Officer Cletus #1, 2, and possibly even 3&4. I feel *MUCH* safer knowing that I have firearms, and that I am lucky (or, cursed, depending on how you see it.) to have an ex-Marine, and a computer programmer for neighbors, who also own firearms to depend on if the SHTF before the police arrive. Please note, i'm neither screaming that everyone should mount the turret of a T80 to thier rooftops, or set claymore mines under each one of thier windows, or run around with an M60 and a belt of ammo across thier chest firing wildly, merely advocating that if someone percieves a need for one, that they should be able to obtain one, if they are not a violent felon or mentally ill.
The whole "overthrowing an opressive government" topic im not going to TOUCH at this time. Besides Monse seems to be doing a lovely job of that all by himself. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But then, knowing what everyone around you does or does not need at any given moment, you already factored that in didn't you?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My family's house has been robbed 3 times. Each time this occured when we were out of the house for a few hours. Guess a gun would have really helped then wouldn't it? I have never personally been a victim of crime. No-one has tried to invade my house here in Brisbane. No-one has tried to mug me. No-one has tried to rob me. Why the heck would I need a gun?
But it's not only that: no-one I know has been the victim of crime. Closest would be one of my friends who got into a knife-fight at a club. Should he have shot the guy instead? (they both survived with minor injuries btw, the cops broke it up).
I just think that you Yanks are being paranoid. Home defense? Robbers arn't going to come into your house when you're there, it's too risky. Buy some security lights: the kind that light up when anyone comes near. That'll scare off any intruders no worries. Get a dog. It doesn't have to be trained to attack, all it has to do is bark. Going out on the streets? Take some pepper spray or a stun gun. *cue arguement that doped up criminals are going to ignore that* It is one hardcore criminal that takes pepper spray to the eyes and keeps coming. Any criminal that ignores that is going to ignore a bullet in his limbs. Go to some self-defense classes and learn how to defend yourself.
But this won't go anywhere of course. Despite the fact that we do have criminals here in Australia and yes, people do fall victim to crime, we manage to get by just fine with no guns! How come our prisons arn't filled to overflowing? How come we're not all cowering in our homes, knowing that we have no guns to defend ourselves? Like I've said, everyone in America has guns, <i>so why do you still have millions of cases of assault, robbery and theft</i>? Seems like those guns are really stopping all that crime.
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 7 2004, 01:34 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 7 2004, 01:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The Australian people supported the gun legislation (they voted the guy who implimented it, John Howard, back into office twice), and we have no desire to see such a terrible event happen ever again. And it hasn't.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> People will believe it if the government tells them that the gun laws will protect them, even if it is not true. What they think and what is the actual case can be quite different. I'd like to <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=28&t=58152' target='_blank'>point</a> towards another discussion about ignorance, courtesy of MonsE.
So, him being re-elected doesn't mean that the legislation did any law-abiding citiznes any good.
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 7 2004, 02:34 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 7 2004, 02:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I can't recall any massacres before that (except of course the massacres of Aboriginal peoples, but that's more of a differant topic). However, the idea was that it happening once was one time too many. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So, before gun laws, 200 years without a massacre. After gun laws, 8 years without a massacre. Seems like if you're safer with guns, statistically! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Note: for those with teeny tiny underdeveloped senses of humor, that was what we refer to as a 'joke'.</span>
Ever heard of the Jonestown massacre? 913 people died via poisoned fruit drink, and 4 of them by guns. Syllogistic conclusion - BAN ALL FORMS OF KOOL-AID? SO IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN!!! <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 7 2004, 05:00 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 7 2004, 05:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But then, knowing what everyone around you does or does not need at any given moment, you already factored that in didn't you?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My family's house has been robbed 3 times. Each time this occured when we were out of the house for a few hours. Guess a gun would have really helped then wouldn't it? I have never personally been a victim of crime. No-one has tried to invade my house here in Brisbane. No-one has tried to mug me. No-one has tried to rob me. Why the heck would I need a gun?
But it's not only that: no-one I know has been the victim of crime. Closest would be one of my friends who got into a knife-fight at a club. Should he have shot the guy instead? (they both survived with minor injuries btw, the cops broke it up).
I just think that you Yanks are being paranoid. Home defense? Robbers arn't going to come into your house when you're there, it's too risky. Buy some security lights: the kind that light up when anyone comes near. That'll scare off any intruders no worries. Get a dog. It doesn't have to be trained to attack, all it has to do is bark. Going out on the streets? Take some pepper spray or a stun gun. *cue arguement that doped up criminals are going to ignore that* It is one hardcore criminal that takes pepper spray to the eyes and keeps coming. Any criminal that ignores that is going to ignore a bullet in his limbs. Go to some self-defense classes and learn how to defend yourself.
But this won't go anywhere of course. Despite the fact that we do have criminals here in Australia and yes, people do fall victim to crime, we manage to get by just fine with no guns! How come our prisons arn't filled to overflowing? How come we're not all cowering in our homes, knowing that we have no guns to defend ourselves? Like I've said, everyone in America has guns, <i>so why do you still have millions of cases of assault, robbery and theft</i>? Seems like those guns are really stopping all that crime. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> We have more crime because we are a bigger country.
Why did your crime rates increase when the gun ban was instituted? Your legislature owned you.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes I do. Getting a semi-automatic weapon is a lot harder to do illegally<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
stop
hahahahaha
No it isn't. It's a little more expensive, but you end up getting more bang for your buck. If you don't believe me, go and try it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We have more crime because we are a bigger country. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm talking crime rates, not numbers.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why did your crime rates increase when the gun ban was instituted? Your legislature owned you. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Since we're down to mocking one another, hahahaha at you for not reading the links I posted that showed that <b>crime rates did not increase.</b>
Let me simplify this for your good self and Monse.
When we had guns, we had a massacre.
When we didn't have guns, we didn't have a massacre.
That's really as simple as it gets. Now I know you Yanks have massacres every few years like the sniper incident a while back or the Columbine shooting, but when we had one we decided to do something about it. *cue the arguements that gun control was tightened after said incidents* Obviously it's not enough.
See this is why I don't get into gun arguements with Americans. I'd rather debate religion with Marine01 <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Jan 7 2004, 12:09 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Jan 7 2004, 12:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> When we had guns, we had a massacre.
When we didn't have guns, we didn't have a massacre. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> And for the other 199 years that you had guns and no massacre, you are crediting... what? We need to change this forum title to 'Syllogism Central". Guns kill people. People are killed in massacres. Therefore all massacres are caused by guns.
BAN KOOL-AID BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE, YOU FOOLS!!! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Guns kill people. People are killed in massacres. Therefore all massacres are caused by guns. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Martin Bryant killed 35 people with guns. That's what happened, and the government took steps. Note that the Australian people voted the guy behind this legislation back into office twice, and he's currently our Prime Minister. We supported this action because we never wanted to see another Port Arthur again. Once was quite enough for us.
I know that Americans think differantly about this whole issue. But please try to understand that we do not believe our civil rights were being taken away from us. We do not think the government is out to get us and form a dictatorship now that our guns have been taken away.
Tommorow some nut in Sydney could go beserk with a semi-automatic rifle he got illegally and then we'd have to assess our gun situation again. But it hasn't happened yet, and we're quite happy living without guns.
Just to help Ryo, we can compare USA to other countries than Australia. You can take a wild guess what country I had in mind <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Finland, I couldn't find information on how many people are killed with guns every year, however I found out the numbers for murders/year. I can't prove it but from my experience, I think there's a lot smaller percentage of gun murders than in the USA.
USA murder rates: 1 murder/15 000 citizens. Finland murder rates: 1 murder/50 000 citizens.
Hmmm, what's that? We have strict gun laws and people are not able to protect themselves with guns. And behold, we don't have a huge wave of murders every year. Actually, our crime rates in overall all rather low. Not to mention that we have Russia bordering us, and you can guess if they have a lot of illegal firearms, even more than in Mexico.
However in the end, I don't believe banning weapons would work out so well in the USA. You already have so many weapons floating around that criminals would be still carrying them for decades. It would be a good start though. In the meanwhile you'll just have to do the smart thing: give your wallet and let the police handle it instead of going berserk with your glock.
<!--QuoteBegin--Dread+Jan 7 2004, 12:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dread @ Jan 7 2004, 12:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I can't prove it but from my experience, I think there's a lot smaller percentage of gun murders than in the USA.
USA murder rates: 1 murder/15 000 citizens. Finland murder rates: 1 murder/50 000 citizens. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> 98% of statistics are made up on the spot. Since you opened the door to the "%" sign, I'm going to request that you post sources. I also request that you post the rates of vehicular homicides in both countries, as since cars kill more people than guns do every year in the US, they should also be banned.
Edit: And don't people find it a bit amusing that in Britain and Ireland right now, people are going BALLISTIC over the new clean air laws preventing them from smoking in the workplace and such, even though cigarettes kill about 85 bajillion times more people every year than firearms in the UK?
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I don't see people preparing for an alien invasion, for the reason that it's extreamly unlikely. Same with the US turning into a dictatorship; I really can't see how you could warp the current US into a despotic regime. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Lets say nukes hit LA, Chicago, NYC, and Philadelphia. Its mass chaos.
The military is called in to restore order, Congress passes legislation granting emergency power to the president. Welcome to despotism.
A modern version of the foundation of Nazi Germany. Weimer Republic deals with a huge crisis (economic depression and political strife. Hitler gains power, Reichstag burns down (aka, government burns down). Hitler is granted emergency powers.
I'm commander.
Absolutely serious. One thing years in the Infantry taught me was the absolute importance of safe weapons handling. even if you do not own a weapon it's a good idea to go through a familiarization and safe-handling course. The same way it's a good idea to learn basic car troubleshooting or a cooking class: because you just never know when it might save your butt.
The famous (and utterly urban mythological) quote is:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Interviewer: "So, LTG Reinwald, what are you going to do with these young boys on their adventure holiday?"
LTG Reinwald: "We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and shooting."
Interviewer: "Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?"
LTG Reinwald: "I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the range."
Interviewer: "Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?"
LTG Reinwald: "I don't see how, we will be teaching them proper range discipline before they even touch a firearm."
Interviewer: "But you're equipping them to become violent killers."
LTG Reinwald: "Well, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?" <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
AS for Ryo and
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Well I don't see people preparing for an alien invasion, for the reason that it's extreamly unlikely. Same with the US turning into a dictatorship; I really can't see how you could warp the current US into a despotic regime. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While a US dictatorship is unlikely, it's certainly more likely than alien invasion. There are endless thousands of dictatorships paved with roads made of 'it can't happen here' thoughts. Go read about the end of the Roman republic - a senate hundreds of years old, suddenly replaced by dictators and oligarchs. You can say it can't happen all you want, but history does not support your argument.
And fortunately for us, allowing our citizens to remain legally armed also handles the alien invasion risk quite well! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Have you seen either of these articles?
<a href='http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm</a>
<a href='http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp</a>
December 1st 2003 the second amendment was gone....
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps I'll rephrase that. It's true that a US dictatorship could come about. But here's the interesting part: it would only come about if the populace supported it.
Looking at your Roman example, the Roman people put dictators into power in times of crisis; they saw it as a nessessary measure. It was expected that these men would relinquish their power peaceably when the time came, and generally they did. What caused the downfall of the Roman Republic however was the march of Julius Caesar on Rome with his armies. Some time before Caeser, the requirements for being able to join the military were relaxed; previously, a man had to own a certain amount of land. The influx of financially poor recruits into the army had a big impact: these men became extreamly loyal to their generals as their generals gave them shares of plunder and booty. Caesar was incredibly popular amongst his men and thus when he wanted ultimate power, he was able to convince his soldiers to march on Rome and install him as a dictator.
Now Monse. You were a Marine. Do you honestly believe that if the general in command of the Marine Corps ordered the Marines to go to Washington and overthrow the democratically elected government of the United States? That could only occur if the soldiers, and by extension the American people, wanted this to happen. Hence we come back to my original point: the dictatorship could only come about with the support of the American people. And if it did come about in such circumstance, the "people" won't want to overthrow it. They'll believe it is right.
Communists used their connections in the military to gain their status.
Actually that's incorrect. Castro in Cuba enjoyed widespread support amongst the populace when he deposed the dictator Batista, the Chinese Communists had the support of most of China when they drove Chiang Kai Shek offshore to Taiwan, Ho Chi Min and the Vietnamese communists had widespread support amongst the Vietnamese people, the Bolsheviks probably had the least support but even they were able to draw on the support of large numbers of people. Whilst certainly defections from military areas helped Communist causes around the globe, the support of the populace as a whole remained very important.
Besides, because the US military is composed of volunteer American citizens, gaining support amongst the US military would be just the same as gaining support amongst the general population, as the military is part of the population.
And you're quite out of step with most of our European posters. They already think we <b>ARE</b> a dictatorship! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Actually that's incorrect. Castro in Cuba enjoyed widespread support amongst the populace when he deposed the dictator Batista, the Chinese Communists had the support of most of China when they drove Chiang Kai Shek offshore to Taiwan, Ho Chi Min and the Vietnamese communists had widespread support amongst the Vietnamese people, the Bolsheviks probably had the least support but even they were able to draw on the support of large numbers of people. Whilst certainly defections from military areas helped Communist causes around the globe, the support of the populace as a whole remained very important.
Besides, because the US military is composed of volunteer American citizens, gaining support amongst the US military would be just the same as gaining support amongst the general population, as the military is part of the population. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was specifically talking about the soviets and yes Castro was popular during his rise to power INFACT we did support him in his ousting of Butista
Then he came out be a fricken communist.
Because of, I might add, the United States. Che Guevara was a socialist through and through but Castro was always dead keen on democracy and wanted a deomcratic state established in Cuba after Butista was gone. However, the US was very keen on Butista and were quite annoyed when Castro overthrew him and seized all of the US-owned commercial infrastructure in Cuba. The move to take back all of these industries was motivated by the fact that Castro didn't want his country to be effectively controlled by the US, just as it had been since 1898. So when Castro went to the US offering to start up a democratic government in Cuba and requesting US assisstance, the US wouldn't have any part of it and slapped an embargo on Cuba. Castro had no choice but to turn to someone else for badly needed economic assisstance, and the only people willing were the Soviets, obstensibly for their own political ends. Naturally, the Soviets wanted Che's socialist style government, and Castro was forced to comply.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And you're quite out of step with most of our European posters. They already think we ARE a dictatorship! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ruled by a man who didn't recieve a majority of votes? Sounds like a dictatorship to me! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Have you seen either of these articles?
<a href='http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm</a>
<a href='http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp</a>
December 1st 2003 the second amendment was gone.... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
GG USA!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"I know 'the gun solution' (political assassination, open rebellion, etc.) is fraught with peril and inadequate and morally complex and legally illegal. But, what is left? When we peacefully claim our birthrights, peacefully pursue a lawsuit to the U.S. Supreme Court and are stiff-armed while we point to what is written in the Constitution, we are mocked, scorned, ridiculed, rebuffed, ignored, dismissed, and rejected...
"(I)t is not about guns. It never was about guns. It is really about this: 1) liberty; 2) ordinary citizens retaining a legally enforceable right to retain the most efficient, pragmatic means to enforce the rest of their rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution—privately owned, registered or unregistered, firearms; 3) holding government accountable; 4) keeping government from indefinitely blowing through Constitutional red lights, violating the Constitution’s commands; 5) forcing government to wear its Constitutional collar, connected to a Constitutional chain, staked firmly into the bedrock of Constitutional law.
"Now, when government slips that Constitutional collar and refuses to put it back on and wear it compliantly and honor the Constitution’s commands, with the judiciary’s blessings, what then?
"How does one make a snarly, robust, active, gargantuan government wear a collar it does not want to wear? How does one get close to the beast’s teeth and claws to put on that collar and survive?...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
BlakHolez -
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->These atrocities happened in the UK and we banned guns. Result? It's never happened again ("But there is no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it and not having a gun and not shooting someone with it, and you would be a fool and a Communist to make one" - Bill Hicks). It's called valuing human life, I think dead children is a good reason to give something up but it appears other people don't.
Someone please man up and admit the only reason you have a gun in your wardrobe is because it lends a sense of importance to your insecure, paranoid, insular, xenophobic little life.
Rant over, please mark all replies "Right To Bear Arms" or "I would like to kill someone because..."
Flame bait will be welcomed, lets see if anyone can postulate a better arguement than "It's my right.."
In some countries a man has the right to rape his wife, anyone like to defend that?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you knew ANYTHING about the history involving UK and it's ban on guns, you'd know that after the ban on guns was in place, crime rates SOARED afterwards... congrats on killing your own argument! I'm glad you knew sub-conciously that you were wrong.
So explain to me why crime rates in Australia did not "soar" when the government banned most guns following the Port Arthur massacre?
So explain to me why crime rates in Australia did not "soar" when the government banned most guns following the Port Arthur massacre? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do not know the history surrounding that incident - nor do I care.
However, I do know you are missing the point:
Do you <b>honestly</b> think a gun ban would have prevented the Port Arthur massacre?
Don't be naive. Laws only affect those who already obeyed it in the first place, and most likely obey'ed societies norms and taboo's (such as killing others is bad).
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes I do. Getting a semi-automatic weapon is a lot harder to do illegally, and there's no guareentee that the man in question, Martin Bryant, would have been able to find one. Yes the guy was unstable but when a gun is easy to obtain, it's a lot easier to carry out unstable thoughts. There hasn't been a massacre since most guns were banned and much tighter guns laws introduced. Heck the closest thing was a student at a university in Melbourne who tried to shoot his lecturer with a pistol and killed 2 students.
There isn't any reason for someone in Australia to own a semi-automatic weapon. Shotguns have a role for farmers, and some sportsmen use rifles or pistols. But the average Joe Citizen has no need for a gun and I sleep a lot easier at night knowing that my neighbours don't own guns.
Since 1996, when the Port Arthur shooting occured, Australia has had no massacres. In fact, <a href='http://www.guncontrol.org.au/index.php?article=32' target='_blank'>as this site points out</a>, crime went down after the laws went in. You can check all the facts and figures if you want. The simple fact is though that losing guns did not cause more crime in Australia.
<a href='http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/gunaus.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/gunaus.htm</a>
<a href='http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/ausguns.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/ausguns.htm</a>
Even snopes discredits the legend that Australia suffered a crime wave following the 1996 massacre.
Now look at America. Just about everyone has guns. <a href='http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/' target='_blank'>So why do you still have heaps of crime?</a> . Arn't guns supposed to protect people? That doesn't seem to be the case at all. Instead, despite guns in every section of American society, crime rates remain high and your prisons remain full to bursting. Guns arn't preventing crime.
But of course you're going to say that if guns were banned, crime would skyrocket. It didn't happen here. Why do you think it would happen there?
Regarding Austrlia's crime rate.
The gun-buy back program only effected law abiding people. Law abiding people don't constitute crap in a crime satistic.
Taking into account this message, let me post other satistics
The violent crime statistics shown below were retrieved on March 27, 2000, from the Australia Bureau of Statistics website:
VIOLENT CRIME
1997
1998
TREND
Murder
321
284
-11.5%
Attempted Murder
318
382
+20.1%
Manslaughter
39
49
+25.6%
Assault
124,500
132,967
+6.8%
Sexual Assault
14,353
14,568
+1.5%
Kidnaping/abduction
562
662
+17.8%
Armed Robbery
9,054
10,850
+19.8%
Unarmed Robbery
12,251
12,928
+5.5%
TOTAL
161,398
172,690
+7.0%
There was a decrease in firearms related homide but notice how other forms of crime make up for it.
Regarding America's crime rate
<a href='http://www.toptips.com/CrimeClock.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.toptips.com/CrimeClock.htm</a>
This takes facts from local law enforcement and BATF officials.
How many gun-based massacres had there been before that? Not something they tend to teach over here. Australia is a word in a spelling bee for 8 year olds and that's where the lessons end. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Oh come now! It should be simple for a child to spell "51st State" <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
I can't recall any massacres before that (except of course the massacres of Aboriginal peoples, but that's more of a differant topic). However, the idea was that it happening once was one time too many. The Australian people supported the gun legislation (they voted the guy who implimented it, John Howard, back into office twice), and we have no desire to see such a terrible event happen ever again. And it hasn't.
Yes it could just be a giant co-incidence. But better safe than sorry.
That's subjective. Average PRT (Police Response Time) where I am located is over an hour...which to be fair, is quite good, considering its a 43 minute trip from here to there (and only the city limits in that case!) at 70 miles an hour. But then, knowing what everyone around you does or does not need at any given moment, you already factored that in didn't you? I am not a farmer. I do not hunt for sport. I punch holes in paper most of the time. (Which some consider a sport. I do it becuase it's simply fun as heck.) I also have met and spoken to a few local officers, and came to the conclusion that I am being protected by Officer Cletus #1, 2, and possibly even 3&4. I feel *MUCH* safer knowing that I have firearms, and that I am lucky (or, cursed, depending on how you see it.) to have an ex-Marine, and a computer programmer for neighbors, who also own firearms to depend on if the SHTF before the police arrive. Please note, i'm neither screaming that everyone should mount the turret of a T80 to thier rooftops, or set claymore mines under each one of thier windows, or run around with an M60 and a belt of ammo across thier chest firing wildly, merely advocating that if someone percieves a need for one, that they should be able to obtain one, if they are not a violent felon or mentally ill.
The whole "overthrowing an opressive government" topic im not going to TOUCH at this time. Besides Monse seems to be doing a lovely job of that all by himself. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
My family's house has been robbed 3 times. Each time this occured when we were out of the house for a few hours. Guess a gun would have really helped then wouldn't it? I have never personally been a victim of crime. No-one has tried to invade my house here in Brisbane. No-one has tried to mug me. No-one has tried to rob me. Why the heck would I need a gun?
But it's not only that: no-one I know has been the victim of crime. Closest would be one of my friends who got into a knife-fight at a club. Should he have shot the guy instead? (they both survived with minor injuries btw, the cops broke it up).
I just think that you Yanks are being paranoid. Home defense? Robbers arn't going to come into your house when you're there, it's too risky. Buy some security lights: the kind that light up when anyone comes near. That'll scare off any intruders no worries. Get a dog. It doesn't have to be trained to attack, all it has to do is bark. Going out on the streets? Take some pepper spray or a stun gun. *cue arguement that doped up criminals are going to ignore that* It is one hardcore criminal that takes pepper spray to the eyes and keeps coming. Any criminal that ignores that is going to ignore a bullet in his limbs. Go to some self-defense classes and learn how to defend yourself.
But this won't go anywhere of course. Despite the fact that we do have criminals here in Australia and yes, people do fall victim to crime, we manage to get by just fine with no guns! How come our prisons arn't filled to overflowing? How come we're not all cowering in our homes, knowing that we have no guns to defend ourselves? Like I've said, everyone in America has guns, <i>so why do you still have millions of cases of assault, robbery and theft</i>? Seems like those guns are really stopping all that crime.
People will believe it if the government tells them that the gun laws will protect them, even if it is not true. What they think and what is the actual case can be quite different. I'd like to <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=28&t=58152' target='_blank'>point</a> towards another discussion about ignorance, courtesy of MonsE.
So, him being re-elected doesn't mean that the legislation did any law-abiding citiznes any good.
So, before gun laws, 200 years without a massacre. After gun laws, 8 years without a massacre. Seems like if you're safer with guns, statistically! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Note: for those with teeny tiny underdeveloped senses of humor, that was what we refer to as a 'joke'.</span>
Ever heard of the Jonestown massacre? 913 people died via poisoned fruit drink, and 4 of them by guns. Syllogistic conclusion - BAN ALL FORMS OF KOOL-AID? SO IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN!!! <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
My family's house has been robbed 3 times. Each time this occured when we were out of the house for a few hours. Guess a gun would have really helped then wouldn't it? I have never personally been a victim of crime. No-one has tried to invade my house here in Brisbane. No-one has tried to mug me. No-one has tried to rob me. Why the heck would I need a gun?
But it's not only that: no-one I know has been the victim of crime. Closest would be one of my friends who got into a knife-fight at a club. Should he have shot the guy instead? (they both survived with minor injuries btw, the cops broke it up).
I just think that you Yanks are being paranoid. Home defense? Robbers arn't going to come into your house when you're there, it's too risky. Buy some security lights: the kind that light up when anyone comes near. That'll scare off any intruders no worries. Get a dog. It doesn't have to be trained to attack, all it has to do is bark. Going out on the streets? Take some pepper spray or a stun gun. *cue arguement that doped up criminals are going to ignore that* It is one hardcore criminal that takes pepper spray to the eyes and keeps coming. Any criminal that ignores that is going to ignore a bullet in his limbs. Go to some self-defense classes and learn how to defend yourself.
But this won't go anywhere of course. Despite the fact that we do have criminals here in Australia and yes, people do fall victim to crime, we manage to get by just fine with no guns! How come our prisons arn't filled to overflowing? How come we're not all cowering in our homes, knowing that we have no guns to defend ourselves? Like I've said, everyone in America has guns, <i>so why do you still have millions of cases of assault, robbery and theft</i>? Seems like those guns are really stopping all that crime. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
We have more crime because we are a bigger country.
Why did your crime rates increase when the gun ban was instituted? Your legislature owned you.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes I do. Getting a semi-automatic weapon is a lot harder to do illegally<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
stop
hahahahaha
No it isn't. It's a little more expensive, but you end up getting more bang for your buck. If you don't believe me, go and try it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm talking crime rates, not numbers.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why did your crime rates increase when the gun ban was instituted? Your legislature owned you.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Since we're down to mocking one another, hahahaha at you for not reading the links I posted that showed that <b>crime rates did not increase.</b>
Let me simplify this for your good self and Monse.
When we had guns, we had a massacre.
When we didn't have guns, we didn't have a massacre.
That's really as simple as it gets. Now I know you Yanks have massacres every few years like the sniper incident a while back or the Columbine shooting, but when we had one we decided to do something about it. *cue the arguements that gun control was tightened after said incidents* Obviously it's not enough.
See this is why I don't get into gun arguements with Americans. I'd rather debate religion with Marine01 <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
When we didn't have guns, we didn't have a massacre. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
And for the other 199 years that you had guns and no massacre, you are crediting... what? We need to change this forum title to 'Syllogism Central". Guns kill people. People are killed in massacres. Therefore all massacres are caused by guns.
BAN KOOL-AID BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE, YOU FOOLS!!! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Martin Bryant killed 35 people with guns. That's what happened, and the government took steps. Note that the Australian people voted the guy behind this legislation back into office twice, and he's currently our Prime Minister. We supported this action because we never wanted to see another Port Arthur again. Once was quite enough for us.
I know that Americans think differantly about this whole issue. But please try to understand that we do not believe our civil rights were being taken away from us. We do not think the government is out to get us and form a dictatorship now that our guns have been taken away.
Tommorow some nut in Sydney could go beserk with a semi-automatic rifle he got illegally and then we'd have to assess our gun situation again. But it hasn't happened yet, and we're quite happy living without guns.
Finland, I couldn't find information on how many people are killed with guns every year, however I found out the numbers for murders/year. I can't prove it but from my experience, I think there's a lot smaller percentage of gun murders than in the USA.
USA murder rates: 1 murder/15 000 citizens.
Finland murder rates: 1 murder/50 000 citizens.
Hmmm, what's that? We have strict gun laws and people are not able to protect themselves with guns. And behold, we don't have a huge wave of murders every year. Actually, our crime rates in overall all rather low. Not to mention that we have Russia bordering us, and you can guess if they have a lot of illegal firearms, even more than in Mexico.
However in the end, I don't believe banning weapons would work out so well in the USA. You already have so many weapons floating around that criminals would be still carrying them for decades. It would be a good start though. In the meanwhile you'll just have to do the smart thing: give your wallet and let the police handle it instead of going berserk with your glock.
Edit: Dumb thinking error.
USA murder rates: 1 murder/15 000 citizens.
Finland murder rates: 1 murder/50 000 citizens. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
98% of statistics are made up on the spot. Since you opened the door to the "%" sign, I'm going to request that you post sources. I also request that you post the rates of vehicular homicides in both countries, as since cars kill more people than guns do every year in the US, they should also be banned.
Edit: And don't people find it a bit amusing that in Britain and Ireland right now, people are going BALLISTIC over the new clean air laws preventing them from smoking in the workplace and such, even though cigarettes kill about 85 bajillion times more people every year than firearms in the UK?