Extremists on this board?
- Thread starter BerettaCougar
- Start date
FirstFreedom
Moderator
But this thread should just be merged into that one, as it's directly in point to that discussion - no need for a new thread.
JuanCarlos
New member
Hey, mvpel, do you have anything comparing those Florida charts to national stats or stats for similarly sized states? Just curious, because I thought crime in general fell almost everywhere during the same period. It cuts both ways, since it debunks the idea that gun control in other areas caused their drops in crime...it also casts doubt on the idea that Rudy Guiliani "cleaned up" NYC...but the impression I've gotten after looking at lots of numbers in various areas for both increased and decreased gun legislation is that, when it comes right down to it, it doesn't do much at all. One way or the other.
This is a really good place to get statistical data on gun deaths by state broken down by a variety of factors. White, black, male, female, this age group, that age group etc. etc.
http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonl...teHomicide.cfm
http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonl...teHomicide.cfm
According to the Dept of Justice,
79% of aggravated assaults were NOT committed by firearms
58% of robberies were NOT firearms related, but
68% of murders were firearms related.
What does this mean? It means that you are 3 times more likely to be killed instead of wounded if you are assaulted by a firearm. All this means is that a firearm is a more effective weapon than say, a knife.
Crime has been falling, even though more and more states have enacted "shall issue" and "castle doctrine" laws, and even considering that over 4 million guns are sold per year in the US.
Even deaths by firearms are misleading-
of the deaths involving firearms, 57% of them were suicides
79% of aggravated assaults were NOT committed by firearms
58% of robberies were NOT firearms related, but
68% of murders were firearms related.
What does this mean? It means that you are 3 times more likely to be killed instead of wounded if you are assaulted by a firearm. All this means is that a firearm is a more effective weapon than say, a knife.
Crime has been falling, even though more and more states have enacted "shall issue" and "castle doctrine" laws, and even considering that over 4 million guns are sold per year in the US.
Even deaths by firearms are misleading-
of the deaths involving firearms, 57% of them were suicides
As a florida resident for the last 21 years having spent most of those in the Greater Orlando region. I agree more people=more crime. I now live in a very rural part of the panhandle and crime is nearly non existent with only 10 or 11 arrests per day for the entire county. If any wants to do that fancy research (I am connected at under 40kbps) to see a low crime rate, I am in Walton county. I will say more guns in criminals hands=more crime. Also more criminals getting away with crimes=more crime as well! JAIL THEM so their crime is against other criminals!
Brent
Brent
TexasSeaRay
New member
If I or any other veteran has to explain this to you, you still will not understand.
And that makes it all the more sad.
Pathetic, actually.
Jeff
HarrySchell
New member
2A is founded in the inalienable human right to an effective self-defense, regardless of oppressor. Oppressors encompass the criminals among us, outside forces and potentially our own government(s). Without the ability to defend your freedom, you have none that is yours. All you have is what someone more powerful than you will let you have by their action or inaction.
Florida is not exemplary of all the US, just as Switzerland, with battle rifles in many homes, has very low gun crime and violent crime, while the UK has more strict gun controls than DC and much higher violent crime. You cannot pick one place, time or factor and tell what the world is...it is like the blind men and the elephant.
John Lott took many factors and lots of data to prove his thesis. There will always be exceptions that prove the rule, too.
I am an extremist if you define one as being unwilling to give my life up without a fight. I would kill someone without hesitation if my kids were threatened. There are a lot of reasons to take that decision.
I would hope God would understand why I did what I did, and that in His eyes it was the right thing. He will decide the fate of my soul, and is my Master, not some silly Senator.
I think the least likely reason to go to arms will be a general uprising against our current form of government. First is the common criminal. second will be if and when radical Islam or a similar group figures they can start playing around as they are in France and elsewhere. While US police and military forces will react in that case, there will be some level of self-defense by citizens as the jihadis will not always hit where the police are (duh) and when seconds count, the police are at best minutes away.
Some look at the world as an ever-improving place, and I can agree with that in many ways. However, there is darkness out there. Evil does come knocking, and you can take an active role in your own rescue or you can hope someone will save you. For my limited exposure to violence and the limits of police protection, I think that is a losing bet, but do what you want.
Just let me do what I think is best for me (it's called freedom and "choice") and we will get along fine.
Florida is not exemplary of all the US, just as Switzerland, with battle rifles in many homes, has very low gun crime and violent crime, while the UK has more strict gun controls than DC and much higher violent crime. You cannot pick one place, time or factor and tell what the world is...it is like the blind men and the elephant.
John Lott took many factors and lots of data to prove his thesis. There will always be exceptions that prove the rule, too.
I am an extremist if you define one as being unwilling to give my life up without a fight. I would kill someone without hesitation if my kids were threatened. There are a lot of reasons to take that decision.
I would hope God would understand why I did what I did, and that in His eyes it was the right thing. He will decide the fate of my soul, and is my Master, not some silly Senator.
I think the least likely reason to go to arms will be a general uprising against our current form of government. First is the common criminal. second will be if and when radical Islam or a similar group figures they can start playing around as they are in France and elsewhere. While US police and military forces will react in that case, there will be some level of self-defense by citizens as the jihadis will not always hit where the police are (duh) and when seconds count, the police are at best minutes away.
Some look at the world as an ever-improving place, and I can agree with that in many ways. However, there is darkness out there. Evil does come knocking, and you can take an active role in your own rescue or you can hope someone will save you. For my limited exposure to violence and the limits of police protection, I think that is a losing bet, but do what you want.
Just let me do what I think is best for me (it's called freedom and "choice") and we will get along fine.
Another part of this data that seems a bit more difficult to pin down is the number of shooting deaths that are criminal on criminal. Drug dealer on drug dealer or buyer etc. etc. I think if you could cull these numbers from the statistics the numbers would drop dramatically.
JuanCarlos
New member
Yeah, while I don't think these kinds of things are necessarily beneficial to society I think that often by including criminals "killing each other" in crime stats the public at large gets an inflated sense of their chances of becoming a victim.
As for suicides, the second anybody mentions a statistic that includes them I generally know I can disregard anything else they say.
The Tourist
Moderator
In polite society, that issue does make us extremists.
TexasSeaRay said:
I do know that I am a pacifist, but not in the definition most use.
For example, I always thought that it was noble for George Washington to be called "The first in war, the first in peace."
And frankly, I've been scared silly in actually trying to live that. In securing the help in Wisconsin's politics, I've had to walk into the towns and clubhouses of many unknown motorcycle clubs.
The prize was worth the fear.
The problem in using language is that we let our detractors use those words to define us to their standards.
If I had a sit-down with TexasSeaRay, explained some history, perhaps waltzed through my gun collection and had a cold beverage, it would not bother me one whit for him to introduce me as "This is Chico, a pacifist."
There's a world of difference in the phrase, "He won't support American ideals, he's a pacifist."
And this is the main problem is defining men by a terse label.
The Tourist
Moderator
fossten said:
LOL. Sounds like you like to debate.
Hee-hee. *Chico rubs swarf covered hands in a villainous roll of glee*
As one contender once remarked, "I have my Bible, my rifle and my courage. I have everything I need..."
The Tourist
Moderator
fossten said:
I'm not enough of a computer geek to know what that means. I do love the proper use of the language.
I do like to debate posers, conspiracy theorists, fakirs, minstrels and goobers who park to close to my truck. One guy cried so hard he forgot to switch his mom's laundry to "permanent press."
Oh, well, that's the problem with a basement bedroom...
Mister_Dinky
Moderator
Look at the state of Florida, one of the most gun populated states, and one of the highest gun crime states.
We all know that the cause is not the number of firearms. The real root cause is demographics.
As the late Howard Cossell used to say, "You know it. I know it. The fans know it." Fess up. You know it too, so put your rant in a sock and save the drama for your mama.
We all know that the cause is not the number of firearms. The real root cause is demographics.
As the late Howard Cossell used to say, "You know it. I know it. The fans know it." Fess up. You know it too, so put your rant in a sock and save the drama for your mama.