Derek 2.0 Posted May 16, 2015 Report Posted May 16, 2015 (edited) The reason for a bad law is quite irrelevant to the badness of the law. A few years back Chicago changed their laws allowing more CC. After half a year, they had a few fewer murders, and John Locke happily posted this on his blog. By the end of the year, they had significantly more murders than the previous years. Locke stopped mentioning Chicago....... So what you're saying, gun violence isn't directly predicated on laws within a given jurisdiction.......... The fact that you can safely transport guns is quite irrelevant to the fact that so many cannot that the US murder rate resembles a developing country. Your argument is identical to the following: I can safely plant landmines in my front yard, and never have a problem, therefore everyone should be able to. I never suggested everyone should be able to though.........I'm quite alright with licencing, both initial lawful ownership and concealed carry permits........ Mexico is the exception that proves the rule. The fact you are limited to referencing Mexico constantly, means you understand this. If your point was valid, you would be able to mention many examples, but you cannot. You are stuck with one of the most corrupt, barely developed countries in the western hemisphere which is effectively ruled by druglords. The fact that you are stuck with this example, should inform you about the strength of your argument. No doubt, it will not. It reminds me of people who argue for herbal cancer treatments, because 'they knew this one guy once...' The entirely of Europe, Scandinavia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand stand in defiance of your point. In other words, everywhere that anyone would ever want to live in the modern world. You will of course, look away. Well no, it doesn't.....as I already highlighted various European countries that allow both the lawful ownership of handguns and the lawful carrying of them for self defense.......that you failed to address this, shows the weakness of your argument... Edited May 16, 2015 by Derek 2.0 Quote
hitops Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) So what you're saying, gun violence isn't directly predicated on laws within a given jurisdiction......... No, I'm saying that when gun laws were loosened in a violent city, more violence followed rather that what was predicted, which was less. This was a change in crime rate along with a change in laws, in the same city in the same time period. Much better comparison than different cities or states. I never suggested everyone should be able to though.........I'm quite alright with licencing, both initial lawful ownership and concealed carry permits........ Sure but that's the argument - that guns CCW are fine because 'I handle mine just fine'. Well, tons of people don't, and the results effect society of a whole. If the criteria is what each individual can handle, regardless of the downstream effects of that, then the landmine example is perfectly analogous. Well no, it doesn't.....as I already highlighted various European countries that allow both the lawful ownership of handguns and the lawful carrying of them for self defense.......that you failed to address this, shows the weakness of your argument... You will need to specific cite those laws. If you are talking about Switzerland, sorry they have UBER strict laws on ammunition, both transport and maximum possession at one time. If you are talking about Russia, great another nation recovering from mobster rule (Soviets) is about as relevant as Mexico. If you talking about others, you will have to be more specific. The overwhelming majority of comparable nations have very low crime vs US, and very strict gun laws. Basically.......all the places people want to live. Edited May 20, 2015 by hitops Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted May 20, 2015 Report Posted May 20, 2015 The Mexico reference has always made me chuckle as well. A trip to the country (a step or two outside of the Holiday Inn of course) could help clear that one up. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted May 21, 2015 Report Posted May 21, 2015 No, I'm saying that when gun laws were loosened in a violent city, more violence followed rather that what was predicted, which was less. This was a change in crime rate along with a change in laws, in the same city in the same time period. Much better comparison than different cities or states. I get what you're saying, its just a poor conclusion.......in your cited example, gun violence both decreased and increased back again, despite the firearms laws. Likewise, during this period, nationwide, both the Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to lapse and the issuance of CCW permits increased throughout the United States, yet gun violence continued to trend downwards (as it has since the 1970s)..........a clear indication that gun rights and gun control play little into actual gun violence. Sure but that's the argument - that guns CCW are fine because 'I handle mine just fine'. Well, tons of people don't, and the results effect society of a whole. If the criteria is what each individual can handle, regardless of the downstream effects of that, then the landmine example is perfectly analogous. You're creating a strawman.........I never suggested society as a whole should have the right to legal concealed carrying of firearms for self defense.......as I've said, I fully support licensing. Furthermore, you argument is devoid of logic......You've stated that you're ok with Canadians owning handguns, in addition you've stated, under dire circumstances, you're ok with Canadians defending themselves with such firearms in their homes.........you've yet to explain your leap from Canadian handgun owners being allowed to own, transport (to a range) and defend themselves if needed (in extreme circumstance) in their home, but oppose licensed Canadians from being able to defend themselves outside of their home with handguns.... How do you concede a scenario in which a Canadian could lawfully defend themselves (or their family) in their home, but not defend themselves in public........that makes no sense. You will need to specific cite those laws. If you are talking about Switzerland, sorry they have UBER strict laws on ammunition, both transport and maximum possession at one time. If you are talking about Russia, great another nation recovering from mobster rule (Soviets) is about as relevant as Mexico. If you talking about others, you will have to be more specific. The overwhelming majority of comparable nations have very low crime vs US, and very strict gun laws. Basically.......all the places people want to live. I already listed five European countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy and the Czech Republic) that allow their citizens to apply for concealed carry permits. And you're wrong about Switzerland The Swiss Weapons Act requires an acquisition license for handguns and a carrying license for the carrying of any permitted firearm for defensive purposes. Exceptions exist for hunters. Automatic weapons are banned. It is not a surprise, as these five European nations are also World renowned manufactures of firearms, including handguns (the Austrian Glock is one of the most popular handguns on the planet, and is considered by most as "America's handgun" despite being Austrian), yet require their citizens to obtain a license/permit to carry firearms for self defense, but still have very little gun crime...... As I've said, gun control or gun rights play little into gun violence within a given society......case in point Mexico. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted May 21, 2015 Report Posted May 21, 2015 You actually believe Mexican gun laws fail for some other reason than they are not enforced. What do you think their drug laws say.... Quote
hitops Posted May 21, 2015 Report Posted May 21, 2015 (edited) I get what you're saying, its just a poor conclusion.......in your cited example, gun violence both decreased and increased back again, despite the firearms No it didn't decrease then increase, the tally was simply mis-interterpreted comparing the first half of the year to the first half of the previous year. When the whole year was tabulated, it was in fact an increase. laws. Likewise, during this period, nationwide, both the Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to lapse and the issuance of CCW permits increased throughout the United States, yet gun violence continued to trend downwards (as it has since the 1970s)..........a clear indication that gun rights and gun control play little into actual gun violence. As it did in many countries. You're creating a strawman.........I never suggested society as a whole should have the right to legal concealed carrying of firearms for self defense.......as I've said, I fully support licensing. When you say licensed users can have them, you are in effect saying everyone can have them, because that is exactly what happens in the US with that policy. Yet in Canada, where laws are stricter, gun ownership and use is far, far lower not just for legal owners, but illegal users as well. Furthermore, you argument is devoid of logic......You've stated that you're ok with Canadians owning handguns, in addition you've stated, under dire circumstances, you're ok with Canadians defending themselves with such firearms in their homes.........you've yet to explain your leap from Canadian handgun owners being allowed to own, transport (to a range) and defend themselves if needed (in extreme circumstance) in their home, but oppose licensed Canadians from being able to defend themselves outside of their home with handguns.... Because the laws that allow you to concealed carry, allow more loose firearm storage and transportation in general. In practice, the typical fight+relationship+alcohol combo that makes up the typical US murder (FBI data), is a lot worse when the gun is on your belt, vs when there is some barrier to you accessing it. The data amply demonstrates this. When it is easily available, it get used to kill. The FBI data shows this - most murders are with available handguns. In Canada, most attempts are with knives, but because knives aren't as good at killing, far more survivors. It's a balance between defence in the home, and wild west in the streets. We plenty of precedent and data from many countries to know which polices strict that balance best. I already listed five European countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy and the Czech Republic) that allow their citizens to apply for concealed carry permits. What a bunch of nonsense: Germany - Carry permit is SUPER hard to get, limited to a tiny group that must demonstrate absolute need for firearm. First line of the wiki article: Gun legislation in Germany is considered among the strictest gun control in Europe Austria - Must complete military service, have secure safe for gun which police must come to your house and check, and can only carry at home and at work. Other carry very difficult to obtain. Also can only own 2 guns. Italy - strictly controlled, no right to bear arms. Extremely hard to get concealed carry - must prove absolute need (transporting high-value jewellery, lots of money, security guard, etc) The average person cannot get. Switzerland - Can own 3 weapons. Concealed carry of handgun is banned, except for absolute need. Czech Republic - Liberal gun laws (by European standards) but real ownership rate only half that of Canada. Maybe they just aren't interested. Murder rate about 50% less than Canada. And you're wrong about Switzerland The very first line from that link: "Switzerland has a comprehensive gun control regime..." It then goes on to explain all the ways they carefully control the possession and transport of guns and ammunition. You think this supports your point? lol It is not a surprise, as these five European nations are also World renowned manufactures of firearms, including handguns (the Austrian Glock is one of the most popular handguns on the planet, and is considered by most as "America's handgun" despite being Austrian), yet require their citizens to obtain a license/permit to carry firearms for self defense, but still have very little gun crime...... They (Austria) have very little guns too, what a coincidence. The other four.....all far more strict than the US in number, type, ammo, and concealment. Not even close. These five nations in fact make the counter-point, the US would do well to adopt the controls those nations have, which still allow weapons in homes for defence in most cases. As I've said, gun control or gun rights play little into gun violence within a given society......case in point Mexico. Again stuck on the organized-crime run Mexico. Weird. Edited May 21, 2015 by hitops Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted May 21, 2015 Report Posted May 21, 2015 No it didn't decrease then increase, the tally was simply mis-interterpreted comparing the first half of the year to the first half of the previous year. When the whole year was tabulated, it was in fact an increase. And since? As it did in many countries. Exactly, despite differing gun laws in each country, hence the presence (or absence) of gun violence. When you say licensed users can have them, you are in effect saying everyone can have them, because that is exactly what happens in the US with that policy. Yet in Canada, where laws are stricter, gun ownership and use is far, far lower not just for legal owners, but illegal users as well. No, that's not what I'm saying, as licence holders in the States are not the ones committing gun violence (as proven in data I already provided) Because the laws that allow you to concealed carry, allow more loose firearm storage and transportation in general. Huh? So what you're saying, is that I, a current licensed handgun owner, would be more likely to commit a crime with my legal firearms because I would then transport in a waistband holster instead of in a carrying case? In practice, the typical fight+relationship+alcohol combo that makes up the typical US murder (FBI data), is a lot worse when the gun is on your belt, vs when there is some barrier to you accessing it. What data? I provided data proving the opposite. The data amply demonstrates this. When it is easily available, it get used to kill. The FBI data shows this - most murders are with available handguns. In Canada, most attempts are with knives, but because knives aren't as good at killing, far more survivors. What data? It's a balance between defence in the home, and wild west in the streets. We plenty of precedent and data from many countries to know which polices strict that balance best. So you feel Canadians can defend themselves at home, but not outside the home.........I'd very much like to see this data you keep speaking of..... What a bunch of nonsense:Germany - Carry permit is SUPER hard to get, limited to a tiny group that must demonstrate absolute need for firearm. First line of the wiki article: Gun legislation in Germany is considered among the strictest gun control in Europe Austria - Must complete military service, have secure safe for gun which police must come to your house and check, and can only carry at home and at work. Other carry very difficult to obtain. Also can only own 2 guns. Italy - strictly controlled, no right to bear arms. Extremely hard to get concealed carry - must prove absolute need (transporting high-value jewellery, lots of money, security guard, etc) The average person cannot get. Switzerland - Can own 3 weapons. Concealed carry of handgun is banned, except for absolute need. Czech Republic - Liberal gun laws (by European standards) but real ownership rate only half that of Canada. Maybe they just aren't interested. Murder rate about 50% less than Canada. All European nations that allow their citizens to carry handguns, after obtaining a permit/license, for self defense ........like I was saying. The very first line from that link: "Switzerland has a comprehensive gun control regime..." It then goes on to explain all the ways they carefully control the possession and transport of guns and ammunition. You think this supports your point? lol Yes it does, Swiss law is very similar to Canadian laws, except the Swiss are aloud to carry handguns for self defense with a CCW permit........it proves my point exactly. They (Austria) have very little guns too, what a coincidence. The other four.....all far more strict than the US in number, type, ammo, and concealment. Not even close. So what? That wasn't the point as to what I proved. These five nations in fact make the counter-point, the US would do well to adopt the controls those nations have, which still allow weapons in homes for defence in most cases. Who's talking about the United States? As I said, Canadians, like those in the five nations highlighted, should be afforded the same right to defend themselves and their family with a handgun....... Again stuck on the organized-crime run Mexico. Weird. Yes, because you keep failing to make the leap............ You suggest, despite very strict gun laws, gun violence in Mexico is still present because of criminals. On the inverse, gun violence is present in the United States because of the numbers of guns......... Gun Crime in Mexico = criminals Gun Crime in the United States = too many guns......... Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted May 21, 2015 Report Posted May 21, 2015 You may be finally getting it. Gun crime in both countries is a combination of both. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.