What is more important to you, life or guns?

[DebateChallenge]

And actually, when I go outside of my house, the last thing in my mind is firearms and I better be on the lookout for loonies.

That being the case then you shouldn't want to ban firearms or make them harder to legally get and/or legally carry. After all, if you did want to ban firearms or allow the government to control their possession and distribution more strictly, than they wouldn't be the last thing on your mind.

The fact that they are the last thing on your mind would mean that, at least to you, restricting them is not all that important.

 

[DebateChallenge]

If you wish to make an argument, I'm fine with that. If you want me to go off to youtube videos and try and search through them wondering which part of it is relevant, you can think again.

Its just one youtube video that the link I provided takes you do, you will not have to search through multiple videos.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

Its just one youtube video that the link I provided takes you do, you will not have to search through multiple videos.

I'll still wait for you to make your argument, thanks.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

What is more important to you, life or guns?

There is no conflict between the two.

 

[rickc]

Every heard the of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is in the Declaration of Independence. I find it interesting that as part of our God given rights, life comes before liberty and happiness. In our country that is no longer true. Life seems to come after guns. To so many Americans the loss of life is just what people have to pay so they can have all and any type of guns they want. Some on this board actually believe that the weapons they should be able to own include something like the M259 Saw, a weapon that is fully automatic and can put out up to 800 rounds per minute. Just think how many lives would have been lost if the Dayton or El Paso shooter would have been able to buy that kind of weapon at any gun shop? I come from a military family and none of my family think that the public should be able to buy military weapons. I think we ought to change the Declaration to say instead of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" to "semiautomatics rifles, automatic pistols and body armor". Doesn't have the same punch, but is more closely in tune with modern day America.

One day my life and my loved one's life may be dependent of my guns. When that day comes i want to be prepared. I feel sorry for those who fear guns and won't be able to protect their loved ones.

 

[BahamaBob]

Guns laws have little to do with gun violence. I lived in Lake Forest a suburb of Chicago. Most of my neighbors and myself owned guns. No one ever got shot. I never even heard a gun shot. A few miles away dozens of people were shot every weekend in a city with some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Most of these people were shot by people barred from owning firearms. The facts are that gang bangers don't care about laws. They will do what is necessary to get weapons and they will continue killing one another. If gun ownership was a factor in shooting, the people with the most guns would be doing the most shootings. The facts show just the opposite. The guy living in the suburbs with a safe full of guns almost never shoots anyone. It is the creeps with the stolen or illegally purchased guns who do most of the shootings.

Mass shootings are little more than media hype. We live in a country of 330 million people. Some of these people are A-holes. No matter what bans or laws you pass, A-holes are gonna be A-holes. A few A-holes out of 330 million people should not make an intelligent person want to change the way everyone lives. You are many times more likely to be struck by lightning than shot by a mass shooter. You are thousands of times more likely to be bit by a dog than shot by a mass shooter. Does that mean that we should all wear tinfoil hats and require all dogs to be muzzled? Heck no, it is just the media playing the lemmings for ratings. In truth, the media coverage of mass shootings is a key factor in the cause of mass shootings. If the media did not cover these shootings many would not occur. It simply allows some A-hole loser to believe he is big news.

 

[jaeger19]

Oh sigh....

No, law abiding citizens did not lose their ability to use handguns to defend themselves, because almost no one was using handguns to defend themselves.

y.

Sigh... I never ever said that they did. I said the facts.. which is when the handgun ban was enacted.. murder rates went UP.. exponentially for a number of years.

Which shows that increasing gun control.. did not decrease murders and make you safer.

What's the difference if they're murdered en masse or individually? Dunno, wrong question. The question is "what's the difference between being murdered and not being murdered?"

Exactly. And for a country that has a ton of guns.. we have a comparably low murder rate. We do have some outlier cities (who incidently have high gun control).. who have high murder rates and this pushes us up.

Because the UK has a murder rate much lower than the US. These gun laws save the lives of, in comparison with the US, 2,400 lives a year, or something like that.

Actually.. no.. it does not. IF it did then when your gun law was enacted.. then your murder rate should have gone down.. but it did not.. it went UP.

 

[jamesrage]

And how do you PROVE something when there are so many variables getting in the way?

You can't PROVE this. You can present evidence and you can make an educated guess at best.

However you don't have anything. You just have doubt.

The UK has lower murder and far lower gun murder rates than the US because there isn't the ease of access to guns that the US has.

The US has several times the population as the UK.Which means more larger cities and more crime. There are other factors as to why the UK has less murders than the US.To say its because of their draconian gun control laws is absurd.

And frustratingly you're talking about a 1997 handgun ban not stopping a 1996 massacre. WHAT THE **** DUDE?

1996 or 1997 the handgun ban did not stop this shooting.
Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia

 

[Frigidweirdo]

Sigh... I never ever said that they did. I said the facts.. which is when the handgun ban was enacted.. murder rates went UP.. exponentially for a number of years.

Which shows that increasing gun control.. did not decrease murders and make you safer.



Exactly. And for a country that has a ton of guns.. we have a comparably low murder rate. We do have some outlier cities (who incidently have high gun control).. who have high murder rates and this pushes us up.



Actually.. no.. it does not. IF it did then when your gun law was enacted.. then your murder rate should have gone down.. but it did not.. it went UP.

Well, it depends what the law is supposed to do. Handguns weren't that prevalent in the UK at the time.

BBC News | UK | Public give up 160,000 guns after Dunblane

160,000 handguns were handed in at that time.

Gun Control Network

If you look at this, they have 1,980 incidents of handgun incidents since what appears to be 2006. This isn't very many.

Had handguns been available when gun crime was increasing, then perhaps this gun crime would have been much worse.

The question is, is the UK safer than the US? The answer is yes.

No, the US doesn't have a "comparably low murder rate" unless you start comparing it with third world countries that have a massive breakdown in the ability of the government to do its job.

Take southern Africa. I travelled around the region in 2014.

South Africa is by far the scariest country in the region. 35.9 murders per 100,000
Swaziland has the lowest murder in the region at 9 per 100,000, nearly double the US rate.

Mozambique on the other hand (considered in east Africa but sits next to Swaziland and South Africa) has a murder rate of 3.4, lower than the US's rate. This is because the police are scarier than the criminals. They walk around with guns and look like they're prepared to use them.

The South African govt is notorious for being corrupt. Comparing the US with South Africa would be to complete miss the point.

Comparing the US with comparable countries and you find the US has a murder rate 5 times higher.


Your last comment just shows either how little you're understanding the UK and guns, or how much you're trying to make it all convenient for you.

1996 didn't just introduce a gun ban out of nowhere. There were gun bans in place already, pretty restrictive gun control, much more restrictive than the US has currently.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

The US has several times the population as the UK.Which means more larger cities and more crime. There are other factors as to why the UK has less murders than the US.To say its because of their draconian gun control laws is absurd.


1996 or 1997 the handgun ban did not stop this shooting.
Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia

Are you kidding me? Are you seriously suggesting that the US's size means it's more likely to have a higher PER CAPITA murder rate?

The UK has a population about 5 times smaller than the US.

London however is as big as New York City. 8 million people.

However were London to be 5 times bigger to compare it to the US, it'd have 40 million which is double the size of the US's largest metropolitan area, New York area.

The UK's population density is much, much higher than the US's.

The UK has 704 people per square mile, the US has 87.

No, the handgun ban didn't stop the Cumbria shooting. The only mass shooting that's happened since.

Which is better, one mass shooting in 20 years, or hundreds and hundreds of mass shootings?

The reality is the gun laws work to a certain extent. They don't work 100%, but they work.

 

[jamesrage]

Are you kidding me? Are you seriously suggesting that the US's size means it's more likely to have a higher PER CAPITA murder rate?

The UK has a population about 5 times smaller than the US.

London however is as big as New York City. 8 million people.

However were London to be 5 times bigger to compare it to the US, it'd have 40 million which is double the size of the US's largest metropolitan area, New York area.

The UK's population density is much, much higher than the US's.

The UK has 704 people per square mile, the US has 87.

No, the handgun ban didn't stop the Cumbria shooting. The only mass shooting that's happened since.

Which is better, one mass shooting in 20 years, or hundreds and hundreds of mass shootings?

The reality is the gun laws work to a certain extent. They don't work 100%, but they work.

If the UK was just as big as the US, had the same poverty make up as the US and wasn't on an island then I am sure the UK's murder rate would be just about the same.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

If the UK was just as big as the US, had the same poverty make up as the US and wasn't on an island then I am sure the UK's murder rate would be just about the same.

So, you're literally making this up right now, right?

I see nothing that supports what you're telling me.

 

[vegas giants]

If the UK was just as big as the US, had the same poverty make up as the US and wasn't on an island then I am sure the UK's murder rate would be just about the same.

Cone on dude. You lost this one

 

[jaeger19]

Well, it depends what the law is supposed to do. Handguns weren't that prevalent in the UK at the time.

BBC News | UK | Public give up 160,000 guns after Dunblane

160,000 handguns were handed in at that time.

Gun Control Network

If you look at this, they have 1,980 incidents of handgun incidents since what appears to be 2006. This isn't very many.

Had handguns been available when gun crime was increasing, then perhaps this gun crime would have been much worse.

Nice strawman attempt. The fact remains that when handguns were banned.. your murder rate went UP. So any claim that you make that gun control was effective in lowering murder rates.. has been proven false.

T

he question is, is the UK safer than the US? The answer is yes.

Actually the answer is no if you look at violent crime. Looking at murder is difficult because what is murder, versus manslaughter etc.

And the fact is that America is hurt by a few outlier cities that have high crime rates. but sorry sir..we are definitely not an unsafe country.

1996 didn't just introduce a gun ban out of nowhere. There were gun bans in place already, pretty restrictive gun control, much more restrictive than the US has currently.

So what? The fact is.. that when you did the 1996 ban.. your murder rate went UP.. if all that gun control was effective..then your murder rate should have gone down but it did not.

 

[vegas giants]

Nice strawman attempt. The fact remains that when handguns were banned.. your murder rate went UP. So any claim that you make that gun control was effective in lowering murder rates.. has been proven false.

T

Actually the answer is no if you look at violent crime. Looking at murder is difficult because what is murder, versus manslaughter etc.

And the fact is that America is hurt by a few outlier cities that have high crime rates. but sorry sir..we are definitely not an unsafe country.



So what? The fact is.. that when you did the 1996 ban.. your murder rate went UP.. if all that gun control was effective..then your murder rate should have gone down but it did not.

Take out the crime....and we have low crime rates. Lol

 

[Frigidweirdo]

Nice strawman attempt. The fact remains that when handguns were banned.. your murder rate went UP. So any claim that you make that gun control was effective in lowering murder rates.. has been proven false.

T

Actually the answer is no if you look at violent crime. Looking at murder is difficult because what is murder, versus manslaughter etc.

And the fact is that America is hurt by a few outlier cities that have high crime rates. but sorry sir..we are definitely not an unsafe country.



So what? The fact is.. that when you did the 1996 ban.. your murder rate went UP.. if all that gun control was effective..then your murder rate should have gone down but it did not.

It's like banging your head against a door, repeatedly.

You probably read some gun mag somewhere that said that the murder rate went up after the handgun ban, and you've decided this is nice and convenient.

You haven't got a clue, and I really can't be bothered to listen to you just making bad arguments.

 

[Thorr]

Nice strawman attempt. The fact remains that when handguns were banned.. your murder rate went UP. So any claim that you make that gun control was effective in lowering murder rates.. has been proven false.

T

Actually the answer is no if you look at violent crime. Looking at murder is difficult because what is murder, versus manslaughter etc.

And the fact is that America is hurt by a few outlier cities that have high crime rates. but sorry sir..we are definitely not an unsafe country.



So what? The fact is.. that when you did the 1996 ban.. your murder rate went UP.. if all that gun control was effective..then your murder rate should have gone down but it did not.

I think you are referring to a very small set of data that does indeed show that the initial gun related murder rate did increase, but the general trend post 1996 has been a fall. The current rate is approx 50% lower than it was in 1996. Interestingly, the Australian rate also dropped by 50% over a similar period, which provides some correlation given they also enacted gun control measures in 1996-97. Compare that to the US, where the comparable figure of gun related murders increased by approx 50% (approx 9000 per year to 14000 per year). The per capita rate is also significantly higher in the US than either Australia or the UK.

These are the facts, any by any measure the UK is considered far safer than the UK. If the US was safer than the UK, why do so many in the US feel the need to arm themselves with guns for protection, whilst those in the UK don't. Clearly the UK does not suffer the same paranoia that the US does - no one in the UK is calling for a relaxation of gun control measures, not even on the grounds of safety.

Irrespective of the statistics and how you choose to interpret them - it boils down to a choice as to whether you believe that 14,000 murders per year by guns is acceptable. If not, what is the solution. I have seen plenty of comments for the pro-gun contingent as to why gun control won't work, but very little in the way of what might.

 

[Thorr]

The US has several times the population as the UK.Which means more larger cities and more crime. There are other factors as to why the UK has less murders than the US.To say its because of their draconian gun control laws is absurd.


1996 or 1997 the handgun ban did not stop this shooting.
Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia

What is excessively harsh about the UK gun control laws. No one in the UK is complaining about them, no one is living in fear through the inability to obtain guns - quite the opposite really. In truth, many in the UK are looking across the pond in befuddlement at the USs inability to get a grip of its gun problem.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

I think you are referring to a very small set of data that does indeed show that the initial gun related murder rate did increase, but the general trend post 1996 has been a fall. The current rate is approx 50% lower than it was in 1996. Interestingly, the Australian rate also dropped by 50% over a similar period, which provides some correlation given they also enacted gun control measures in 1996-97. Compare that to the US, where the comparable figure of gun related murders increased by approx 50% (approx 9000 per year to 14000 per year). The per capita rate is also significantly higher in the US than either Australia or the UK.

How is the gun related murder rate significant? People are just as dead if they are murdered using a different sort of weapon.

These are the facts, any by any measure the UK is considered far safer than the UK. If the US was safer than the UK, why do so many in the US feel the need to arm themselves with guns for protection, whilst those in the UK don't. Clearly the UK does not suffer the same paranoia that the US does - no one in the UK is calling for a relaxation of gun control measures, not even on the grounds of safety.

You don't understand freedom. We don't arm ourselves because of any need. We arm ourselves because that's what we choose to do.

Irrespective of the statistics and how you choose to interpret them - it boils down to a choice as to whether you believe that 14,000 murders per year by guns is acceptable. If not, what is the solution. I have seen plenty of comments for the pro-gun contingent as to why gun control won't work, but very little in the way of what might.

I don't think it matters that the murders were carried out with a gun instead of with some other kind of weapon.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

What is excessively harsh about the UK gun control laws.

The lack of weapons suitable for self defense. The prevention of people from carrying guns when they go about in public.

No one in the UK is complaining about them, no one is living in fear through the inability to obtain guns - quite the opposite really.

I expect that the people who wish that they were still free have a complaint or two.

In truth, many in the UK are looking across the pond in befuddlement at the USs inability to get a grip of its gun problem.

What gun problem?

 

[TurtleDude]

What is excessively harsh about the UK gun control laws. No one in the UK is complaining about them, no one is living in fear through the inability to obtain guns - quite the opposite really. In truth, many in the UK are looking across the pond in befuddlement at the USs inability to get a grip of its gun problem.

well given the suppression of free speech over there, I wonder why we don't hear all that much from the people who find British Gun laws idiotic. about 20 years ago, I made 5 trips to Exmoor to do some shooting and all those of the "Countryside Alliance" thought the handgun ban was moronic.

 

[vegas giants]

The lack of weapons suitable for self defense. The prevention of people from carrying guns when they go about in public.



I expect that the people who wish that they were still free have a complaint or two.



What gun problem?

Holy cow

 

[TurtleDude]

The lack of weapons suitable for self defense. The prevention of people from carrying guns when they go about in public.



I expect that the people who wish that they were still free have a complaint or two.



What gun problem?

we can own them, the nanny state subjects cannot

 

[vegas giants]

What is excessively harsh about the UK gun control laws. No one in the UK is complaining about them, no one is living in fear through the inability to obtain guns - quite the opposite really. In truth, many in the UK are looking across the pond in befuddlement at the USs inability to get a grip of its gun problem.

It appears to some that we dont have a problem with gun deaths in America.

Its shocking to hear that kind of denial....isnt it?

 

[Toggle Almendro]

It appears to some that we dont have a problem with gun deaths in America.
Its shocking to hear that kind of denial....isnt it?

Why does it matter if someone is murdered "with a gun" versus "with some other weapon"?