posted
Canada is trying to get gun registration going, and a cost over-run now projects the costs at 1.4 billion dollars - nearly 20 times the original estimated cost.
Not only that, it won't be operational for at least 3 more years, 12 years after the laws passed.
Britian and Australia have seen greatly increasing crime rates since they instituted gun control meaures. Such measures are greatly applauded by criminals since they leave victims defenseless. Liberals certainly have the criminal vote.
Government lawyers in Britian have argued before courts that "burglars are members of the public who must be protected from violent homeowners." Tony Martin was a 54 year-old farmer living alone on isolated property, and had experienced over 24 burglaries. Britian was having a rural crime wave. In 1999, Matin grabed his unregistered shotgun and confronted three robbers going through his home at night, and he killed one (with 29 previous arrests) and wounded another. All three robbers had been in court for previous crimes about 120 times.
Martin was convicrted of murder and given a life sentence. The wounded victim was given government funds to sue Martin.
In August, 2000, it was reported by the BBC that a 93 year-old woman who put up barbed wire around her home after repeated burlaries, was orderd to take it down because it might harm intruders.
British citizens have lost the right to protect themselves from criminals over the last 80 years, as the government began in 1920 to disarm citizens out of fear of a communist revolution modeled after Russia. For 500 years, up until 1953, a citizen-armed Britian had an extremely low crime and murder rate, but as gun control crept in more, this has reversed. In 1953, laws passed so that no one could carry any kind of object (which actaully means most any object, including such things as a jar of facial cream) that could be used as an offensive weapon without legal authority or reasonable excuse, and police could search anyone, anywhere, with a broad scope of power. Those found with such objects, were considered guilty until they could prove their innocence.
A UN study in 2002 places England and Wales at the top of Western world's crime nations.
In the USA, where guns are owned by citizens for self protection, there is very little chance of a "hot" burglary - one where the robbers come into an occupied houes. In England and Wales, over 50 percent of home burglaries are hot, since the criminals know the occupants are unarmed and defenseless.
In the USA, states and cities with more restrictive gun ownership laws have more crime. States with less restrictive gun laws, and particularly those with "right to carry a gun" laws, have less crime.
Police rarely prevent crime - they nearly always come along afterwards, and make a record of crime committed. Those depending on police to fight crime are betting on the losing horse, and will evntually suffer loss or worse.
No area of the USA has more gun control than Washington, D.C. In 1977, Wshington, D.C. instituted a de facto gun ban. The result: The crime rate rose by 72 per cent in Washington D.C. while it actually dropped 36 per cent in the rest of the USA. Washington, D.C.'s murder rate grew to six times that of New York city, and eight times higher than the rest of the USA.
Every Swiss home has a firearm and ammo, which can be freely used. The gobvernment promotes gun ownership by arming every male at the appropriate age. The Swiss enjoy very little crime and very few gun accidents.
Now the liberals, like Clinton, Kerry, and Schumer, are trying to get the criminal vote in other ways than gun control legislation. They are trying to give felons the right to vote, which will greatly increase the Democratic vote. Felons alrady vote illegally, and do so almost exclusively for Democratic candidates as found whenever their illegal voting is detected (detection is very rare since voting is not often checked - the Democrats get most of the illegal vote now).
-------------------- The light of truth is blinding to most.
More comforting to look only at the shadows of falseness.
IP: Logged |
posted
i for one will always have a gun in my home. i cant believe that someone was actually imprisioned for defending his home from burglers, who knows if they were going to kill him first. This is self defense if i ever heard it.
it reminds me of the bumper sticker that i saw that says. "if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them"
-------------------- "Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over." Herbert Hoover 1930
IP: Logged |
posted
Tony Martin was originally sentenced to life, but after many legal battles, he was recently released.
He spent more time in prison than his robbers did though, and Martin was sued by the wounded robber for being wounded by Martin.
In Britain you are not allowed to use anything to defend to yourself if attacked. One case involved a man defending himself from attackers by using a bicycle chain, and he was charged for using the chain against criminals.
-------------------- The light of truth is blinding to most.
More comforting to look only at the shadows of falseness.
IP: Logged |
posted
i guess it makes more sense to be an outlaw because you spend less time in jail and you can plunder others property and money so you wont even need to work. and on top of that if you get wounded in your crimes you can sue your victims and get even more of their money.. god ive been doing it all wrong..
-------------------- "Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over." Herbert Hoover 1930
IP: Logged |
If nobody has guns but the police and registered hunting rifles, there is less gun violence. Which usually translates into less violence and less crime period. Of course, when every red neck in every house in America has a gun, making them illegal all of a sudden will not make every single person turn the guns in and you'd still have outlaws with guns. In which case, they could use their guns against the gunless and rob them blind. In Canada, not many people have guns that are used for robbing, their is high gun ownership here but its mostly in rural parts where its hunting rifles. Because of this in the suburbs and big cities their isnt such a concern with "having a gun to protect yourself", becuase not many people have guns to begin with.
I know its a weird way of thinking for you Art, and I *get* your way of thinking to some extent... but statistically the Canadian way is not so bad.
And yes, our gun registry is a bit of a joke, its one of the reasons the Liberal party has a minority in parliment and was recently taken over by the conservative Paul Martin wing of the party.
IP: Logged |
posted
kevin, i think you are forgetting the basics...
guns don't kill people, people kill people...
i do think it was a mistake for US to allow so many really crappy/disposable handguns on the market... but, how do you make laws to stop only that in a meaningful way.
secondly. drugs and alcohol fit in the same category in the sense of supply issues...neither has ever been successfully controlled either...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kevin954: Top 50 Murders per 1000 people...
24. United States 0.04 per 1000 people
44. Canada 0.01 per 1000 people
46. United Kingdom 0.01 per 1000 people
(http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap)
.....I know its a weird way of thinking for you Art, and I *get* your way of thinking to some extent... but statistically the Canadian way is not so bad.
Your statistics are misleading.
Comparing homicide rates between countries does not take into account cultural factors. The Swiss have a one or more guns in every family, while most Canadian families have no guns, yet the homicide rate in Switzelrand is much lower than in Canada. Clearly more guns mean less homicide in this comparison.
Obviously cultural factors are important.
The blacks in the USA are the source of most crime and homicide there, on a per capita basis. Switzerland does not have this problem, and it is far less of a problem in Canada than in the USA.
The meaningful comparison is within a country where gun control is uneven in different areas of the country. As I showed, the USA has inconsistent gun control - some states allow citizens (non-police) to carry a concealed gun in public without any permit or registration. Other states allow this only with permits. Still other states do not allow concealed carry in public by citizens at all, and some areas have such restrictive laws as to prohibit gun ownership even when kept at home. When we look at crime rates, and homicide rates, in the USA, we find that more crime and homicide exists with more gun carry/ownership restriction.
Clearly the weight of the evidence is more guns equals less crime and less homicide, when cultural factors are controlled.
-------------------- The light of truth is blinding to most.
More comforting to look only at the shadows of falseness.
IP: Logged |
posted
A number of years ago when Maine was considering reopening the moose hunting season because of the number of accidents involved with them, an out of state bunch lobbied hard against the bill. Thiers was an emotional position based on the "save Bambi syndrome". But it wasn't thier husbands,wives,children having collisions and dying with the too many moose that were over populating due to lack of natural predators. For those not familier with this animal, do not mistake hitting a deer and hitting a moose as the same thing. The moose being 8X as large and standing as tall as they do, they frequently go over the hood then through the windshield when hit . Gun control is being instituted by the same mind set, emotion rather than facts. When a gun control advocate's family is wiped out by a knife wielding deranged individual, I suspect they wish they had had a gun to protect them. And the argument that we have police for that function is lame at best. The US supreme court long ago has ruled that the police are not responsible for the individual citizen, but rather the citizenry as a whole. The statistics stated in a previous post between the US, England, and Canada should be disturbing to control advocates, considering Canada, and England have virtualy zero guns compared to the US yet their homicide rate is as high as it is.
"What is ominous is the ease with which some people go from saying that they don’t like something to saying that the government should forbid it. When you go down that road, don’t expect freedom to survive very long." -Thomas Sowell
-------------------- Bring me a shrubbery
IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Swampman, it is emotion versus logic and fact.
As Glassman pointed out, guns don't kill people, people kill people.
I remember seeing a political cartoon years ago depicting a mob at a lynching.
They were stringing up and hanging a gun, to kill it.
A group of snickering criminals were hidden from the mob while observing the lynching, and one says to another, "We are in good shape as long as they keep leaving us alone."
Gun control simply makes law-abidding citizens defenseless against criminals, while police come along after the crime and make a record of it.
Criminals, and their liberal allies who want the criminal vote, love gun control.
-------------------- The light of truth is blinding to most.
More comforting to look only at the shadows of falseness.
IP: Logged |
posted
Dear God... we dont stop people from having the right to own guns in Canada. We simply try to register them so that for instance criminals will not be allowed to own one. Its not about taking away a person's right to own gun at all, if you believe that your sadly mistaken...
IP: Logged |
posted
Your registration comes with a price that will discourage law abidders from having guns, making them defenseless against criminals. This price will go up with time, so that only the rich can afford a gun - leaves the poor defenseless.
Don't sell guns to criminals.
Shoot on sight, anyone caught in a criminal act using a gun.
Execute anyone later convicted of a criminal act using a gun, but was not caught in the act.
Much cheaper than registration and gets rid of criminals but not guns owned by law abidders.
Don't want to execute because you love criminals who use guns? Misguided morality. They are dangerous parasites that harm everyone.
-------------------- The light of truth is blinding to most.
More comforting to look only at the shadows of falseness.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Leinad: Glassman; guns don't kill people, people kill people...
No, people WITH guns kill people.
Less guns in circulation = less killing.
Less killing of criminals by victims of crimes - victims have no guns to protect themselves while crminals have all the guns - and much more crime - criminals have no fear of a victim being armed.
-------------------- The light of truth is blinding to most.
More comforting to look only at the shadows of falseness.
IP: Logged |
posted
My thoughts I buy 1 new gun every year. I never sell them whoever has the most guns and bullets will survive when y2k comes. Thats when I started buying bullets by the case. Good luck breaking in you might trip over a loaded gun in this house. I did have a problem with my brother selling a gun of mine. You know how hard it is to get the serial # from the KBI or local police. Nobody has a clue. I also had a small problem with my background check last year. At one time I held a top secret clearance from the U.S Army and they tell me they are waiting on my background check for a week. I got a better one take a loaded shotgun onto a Army post and they go crazy. First duty station in U.S. I showed up with my fav. 12 gauge in the front seat and they had me lock it up in with the m-16's. Needless to say I had to buy another one. It was easier than checking mine out from the company. I keep a pistol most times in my truck. I was out one day and noticed I had 5 guns laying around in my truck. I decided to limit it to 3 at a time. Even during hunting season. No need to get crazy on anybody.
-------------------- Amazing how much time we spend looking for the truth but never spend the time to get to the point.
IP: Logged |
posted
I want a gun in every home and business as a requirement. That way, it won't be just the criminals with guns. Maybe that will cause them to shy away from crime. Just a plain old sawed off shotgun (nice spread) will do the trick. Those that want to hunt and do target practice may have as many as they wish.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kevin954: Dear God... we dont stop people from having the right to own guns in Canada. We simply try to register them so that for instance criminals will not be allowed to own one. Its not about taking away a person's right to own gun at all, if you believe that your sadly mistaken...
I may be incorrect, and apoligize if I am in fact misinformed, but it seemed to me that the ability to acquire handguns, any "high capacity" weapon, military look alikes, many types of auto loading shotguns, and most definetly any and all full auto firearms are somewhat difficult to own in Canada. While it is true, from my understanding, Canadian citizens are allowed the possesion of most any "approved" type registered hunting rifle. This might be construed by some as being somewhat restrictive of ones rights. The rights I speak of are considered inalienable here in the US and a few other enlightened countries, and that is, the right to self defense weather it be against criminal activity, foreign invasion, or a tyrannical government. I feel I am on firm ground when I state that the average hunting rifle is a poor tool to accomplish any of the above. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty." -Benjamin Franklin
IP: Logged |
posted
Well, whatever, its your country so do it whatever way you damn well please.
We'll do the same, only what we choose to do is different than what you choose to do. It works good for us, and you seem to be pretty happy with your way.
On another note... unless you are going to let private citizens own tanks, helicopters, fighter jets and nuclear ballistic missles... I don't think all the guns in the world are enough to fight against a foreign invasion or tryannical government.
IP: Logged |
posted
Art: Registration will disuade gun ownership?
I disagree. If registration was FREE, and everyone could own as many guns as possible, but just had to register, the only ones left out would be the WACO nutcases who fear black helicoptors, and I don't want them having guns anyway.
Everyone should have guns with registration. Any type of gun. And you should be able to kill any trespasser on your property with proper notification (aka, a sign that says "TRESPASSERS WILL BE SHOT ON SIGHT)
And you're right, the blacks are the root of the violent crime problem.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
