Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2013, 09:48   #41
Pier23
Senior Member
 
Pier23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonD View Post
Are you really naive enough to think that the felons would ever give up their illegal guns? Seriously??

There is no legal scheme that would result in me giving up my firearms.

Do you think a man with this attitude should be the police chief of a major city, one close to a dangerous border? I don't, he's PC and totally unsuitable for police work, not to mention too old, too far removed from real street police work.

I may be wrong but your remarks don't sound very supportive of the 2nd Amendment. Strange. Don
Ahhh.... you are confusing what could be legally permissable and what may be socially supportive with what will work and what I _personally_ want to see happen.

IMHO, any attempt at confiscation will fail. And, IMHO, I think that full-auto weapons should be permitted as well as any type of magazine or ammo. Concealed carry should be a default right across ALL states. My favorite treatise on the subject is Robert Heinlein's "Beyond This Horizon".

Having said that, I have no objection to a police chief or anyone else expressing a contrary view.

Now, as for his qualifications for being police chief, I am not competent to respond. Don't know the person, don't know the town, don't know the issues.

HOWEVER (and do NOT take this fro a troll, it is NOT), regardless of how ingrained our allegiance is to the 2nd Amendment, you cannot argue that a country such as Norway, which for all intents has outlawed firearms, have a very VERY low firearm crime rate. Same for Austrailia. You get the drift.

So, there is some empiracal evidence to support the notion that if you get rid of ALL firearms, your firearm crime rate is reduced.

Do I like that idea? Nope. I love my plinking toys, and if someone comes after me with a .22, I want to come back with a .380. Would I surrender my toys? Nope. Spent too long collecting the modest few I have, and I enjoy them all, and hurt no one with my hobby and interest. Should I be penalized for the misguided few? Do we ban cars because of drunk drivers?

That does not mean though that there are others who think differently, and we need to hear their voices. Because, lets face it, at some point we will all have to compromise. And if we listen to the opposite side, and seriously consider that viewpoint, we may be able to minimize the damage we will suffer. We are gonna get nailed with something... a mag cap will be the least of the injury, but an auto rifle ban is possible, AWB is possible, things could be very bad for us.

Will the mag cap and the AWB and the semi-auto ban solve any of the problems? Nope, too much of all this and more is out there. But logic seldom enters into the legislative process.

So, hope I have clarified the nature of the discussion vs. what I personally want to see happen.

Thx all!
Pier23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 14:24   #42
Bob Hafler
Senior Member
 
Bob Hafler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,205
Who's going to protect Joe Citizen from the border jumpers with nothing to loose, the San Diego police.
Bob Hafler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 16:23   #43
DonD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Central TX
Posts: 4,264


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pier23 View Post
Ahhh.... you are confusing what could be legally permissable and what may be socially supportive with what will work and what I _personally_ want to see happen.

IMHO, any attempt at confiscation will fail. And, IMHO, I think that full-auto weapons should be permitted as well as any type of magazine or ammo. Concealed carry should be a default right across ALL states. My favorite treatise on the subject is Robert Heinlein's "Beyond This Horizon".

Having said that, I have no objection to a police chief or anyone else expressing a contrary view.

Now, as for his qualifications for being police chief, I am not competent to respond. Don't know the person, don't know the town, don't know the issues.

HOWEVER (and do NOT take this fro a troll, it is NOT), regardless of how ingrained our allegiance is to the 2nd Amendment, you cannot argue that a country such as Norway, which for all intents has outlawed firearms, have a very VERY low firearm crime rate. Same for Austrailia. You get the drift.

So, there is some empiracal evidence to support the notion that if you get rid of ALL firearms, your firearm crime rate is reduced.

Do I like that idea? Nope. I love my plinking toys, and if someone comes after me with a .22, I want to come back with a .380. Would I surrender my toys? Nope. Spent too long collecting the modest few I have, and I enjoy them all, and hurt no one with my hobby and interest. Should I be penalized for the misguided few? Do we ban cars because of drunk drivers?

That does not mean though that there are others who think differently, and we need to hear their voices. Because, lets face it, at some point we will all have to compromise. And if we listen to the opposite side, and seriously consider that viewpoint, we may be able to minimize the damage we will suffer. We are gonna get nailed with something... a mag cap will be the least of the injury, but an auto rifle ban is possible, AWB is possible, things could be very bad for us.

Will the mag cap and the AWB and the semi-auto ban solve any of the problems? Nope, too much of all this and more is out there. But logic seldom enters into the legislative process.

So, hope I have clarified the nature of the discussion vs. what I personally want to see happen.

Thx all!
Glad you clarified your attitude. The internet often results in creating unintended impressions. For the most part I agree with what you said and am glad you personally support the 2nd Amendment.

I would counter though regarding Norway. These small Scandinavian countries are not good comparisons with our vastly larger, far more diverse population.

Also, if you want to say fewer guns mean less crime, Switzerland contradicts that. All able bodied males are required to have fully automatic "real" assault weapons in their homes and gun crime is rare there.

Don
DonD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 20:59   #44
GLJones
Senior Member
 
GLJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 528
Send a message via AIM to GLJones
To add to what Don just posted, you cannot separate gun crimes from violent crime. The tool is not what is important, it is the violent act against another. In the case of the UK and Australia, the violent crime rate increased significantly following those countries banning guns. In the UK, the violent use of guns in crime actually increased. The UK currently has a violent crime rate that is over 4 times that of the USA.
If you remove suicide and gang related murders from the US statistics, the US actually has one of the lowest murder rates in the world. I think we can agree that the gangs will still have access to illegal guns even if you were to succeed in banning all guns in the US. In countries (like Japan) where guns are banned, suicide rates are the same or higher than in the US but the tool used is what is available at the time. We DO NOT have a gun problem in the US. We have a gang and drug problem that fuels the majority of violent crimes. Instead of spending all this time, effort, and money trying to regulate or ban a tool, we should put it into eliminating gangs and repeat criminals. That would be MUCH more effective.
__________________
Jerry
Niner #105
Big Dog #1004
Glock 26,30,36 and AR15
GLJones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 21:13   #45
Pier23
Senior Member
 
Pier23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonD View Post
Glad you clarified your attitude. The internet often results in creating unintended impressions. For the most part I agree with what you said and am glad you personally support the 2nd Amendment.

I would counter though regarding Norway. These small Scandinavian countries are not good comparisons with our vastly larger, far more diverse population.

Also, if you want to say fewer guns mean less crime, Switzerland contradicts that. All able bodied males are required to have fully automatic "real" assault weapons in their homes and gun crime is rare there.

Don
Yeah, Switzerland is a good case in point...though I personally don't know what their handgun policy is. And homogeneous countriesndo tend to have less violence overall...see Japan for example. Isreal is another example of a heavily armed citizenry..again, in the "militia" mode.
Pier23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 21:27   #46
Pier23
Senior Member
 
Pier23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLJones View Post
To add to what Don just posted, you cannot separate gun crimes from violent crime. The tool is not what is important, it is the violent act against another. In the case of the UK and Australia, the violent crime rate increased significantly following those countries banning guns. In the UK, the violent use of guns in crime actually increased. The UK currently has a violent crime rate that is over 4 times that of the USA.
If you remove suicide and gang related murders from the US statistics, the US actually has one of the lowest murder rates in the world. I think we can agree that the gangs will still have access to illegal guns even if you were to succeed in banning all guns in the US. In countries (like Japan) where guns are banned, suicide rates are the same or higher than in the US but the tool used is what is available at the time. We DO NOT have a gun problem in the US. We have a gang and drug problem that fuels the majority of violent crimes. Instead of spending all this time, effort, and money trying to regulate or ban a tool, we should put it into eliminating gangs and repeat criminals. That would be MUCH more effective.
There was an NPR report a few days ago (stop shrieking folks) that pointed out that violent crime in a city can be micro-targeted to a few blocks which are the hot spots of violence.

AND...statistically, FIRE Is the largest mass murderer the country has...note the recent 200+ deaths in Buenos Aires a few days ago. Yeah, jumping countries, but you get the point.

But public perception and political expediency are neither prone to in-depth analysis or critical thinking.

Gabby Giffords was on the Hill today testifying that SOMETHING had to be done...THAT is a hard argument to counter.

Yes, Giffords was shot by a whack job who should have never had a gun...doesn't alter the fact he DID have a gun and shot Giffords and several others.

How do we counter this? Frankly, I don't know....
Pier23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 21:31   #47
DonD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Central TX
Posts: 4,264


Quote:
Originally Posted by GLJones View Post
To add to what Don just posted, you cannot separate gun crimes from violent crime. The tool is not what is important, it is the violent act against another. In the case of the UK and Australia, the violent crime rate increased significantly following those countries banning guns. In the UK, the violent use of guns in crime actually increased. The UK currently has a violent crime rate that is over 4 times that of the USA.
If you remove suicide and gang related murders from the US statistics, the US actually has one of the lowest murder rates in the world. I think we can agree that the gangs will still have access to illegal guns even if you were to succeed in banning all guns in the US. In countries (like Japan) where guns are banned, suicide rates are the same or higher than in the US but the tool used is what is available at the time. We DO NOT have a gun problem in the US. We have a gang and drug problem that fuels the majority of violent crimes. Instead of spending all this time, effort, and money trying to regulate or ban a tool, we should put it into eliminating gangs and repeat criminals. That would be MUCH more effective.
Yes, Newcastle, UK has one of the worst violent crime rates in the "civilized" world. Our liberals pick and choose which statistics to promote. They point out the UKs low death rate due to guns. Well, duh of course their rate is low, there are draconian penalties for violating their anti gun laws.

Defending yourself with a gun will put you in prison even if it is acknowledged that you were at risk of serious injury or death. So the criminals walk the streets with clubs, knives and other weapons committing crimes at will.

So we get idiots like Piers Morgan using our media as a soapbox to rail against our firearms traditions. Don

I could really care less about gang bangers shooting each other, means fewer of them to threaten honest citizens. Don
DonD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 21:37   #48
DonD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Central TX
Posts: 4,264


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pier23 View Post
There was an NPR report a few days ago (stop shrieking folks) that pointed out that violent crime in a city can be micro-targeted to a few blocks which are the hot spots of violence.

AND...statistically, FIRE Is the largest mass murderer the country has...note the recent 200+ deaths in Buenos Aires a few days ago. Yeah, jumping countries, but you get the point.

But public perception and political expediency are neither prone to in-depth analysis or critical thinking.

Gabby Giffords was on the Hill today testifying that SOMETHING had to be done...THAT is a hard argument to counter.

Yes, Giffords was shot by a whack job who should have never had a gun...doesn't alter the fact he DID have a gun and shot Giffords and several others.

How do we counter this? Frankly, I don't know....
Squealing by "celebrities" to "DO SOMETHING" is simply an invitation to knee jerk, misguided and worthless legislation. So many of our gun laws are never enforced yet the cry is for still more laws. It never ends and the issues are never addressed.

Most of the gang violence is socioeconomic. If the minorities would get educated and break out of their background, hard I know, much of this would go away. Highly educated and assimilated minorities usually get along well with similar majority individuals. It's hard for well educated people to have intelligent dialogue with 8th grade graduates in gangs like the Crips, Bloods, and MS13. Don
DonD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 21:50   #49
janice6
Platinum Membership
NRA
 
janice6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: minnesota
Posts: 19,581


I suppose he is basing his hypothesis on how well no legal guns for the Mexican citizen is working. Another success story.
__________________
janice6

"Peace is that brief, glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". Anonymous

Earp: Not everyone who knows you hates you.
DOC: I know it ain't always easy bein' my friend....but I'll BE THERE when you need me.
janice6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 22:37   #50
bustedknee
Curmudgeon
 
bustedknee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wythe County, VA
Posts: 4,387
A person steals guns, (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW),



Shoots and kills his own mother (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW),



Transports these guns loaded (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW),



Brings guns onto school property (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW),



Breaks into the school (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW),



Discharges the weapons within city limits (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW),



Murders 26 people (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), and commits suicide (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW).

And there are people in this country that somehow think passing ANOTHER LAW banning guns would protect us from someone like this. If you haven't noticed, people like this are not concerned about breaking laws - they only care about fulfilling their own twisted agenda.

The only people that a gun ban law would impact are the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, which will only serve to cripple the ability to protect ourselves.
__________________
"I am old, sick, and tired of living. If you feel the need to mess with me, go right ahead." My Uncle, with his hand on his pistol, talking to a troublemaker. 2-13-1935 -- 2-1-2013
bustedknee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 22:43   #51
cowboy1964
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 15,350
Did he swear an oath to uphold the Constitution?

Ain't gonna happen, Lansdowne.
cowboy1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 23:06   #52
bmoore
Senior Member
 
bmoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Under a regime.
Posts: 4,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldendog Redux View Post
San Diego has generally been a Conservative area. I know nothing about the current chief. I guess I do now. What a dick.

Now to be fair, he did not say "disarm Americans" he said "...new laws could eventually take all guns off the streets" the implication being illegal guns I expect

I am not agreeing with him, just pointing out what the article stated his words were.

MF
The chief is formerly from San Jose PD I believe. San Diego is and has always been a republican county.
__________________
RIP Okie
bmoore is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:05.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 770
159 Members
611 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31