CDRLabs.com

I've noticed that people have been coming out of the woodworks here as gun owners. Let's get it into one post.

I voted under the "don't care" because that was the closest to what I think...

Having guns for hunting is fine by me, hunting is natrual, especially if you need the animal that you hunt for food, as per "home defense," once again, fine by me, keep it on your property, in your house, and use it on a burglar.

When it comes to carrying with you and concealing & carrying, that's where I draw the line. I'll be refering to the Minnesota "Conceal & Carry" Law here, because that's where I love, and I know most about that law. It makes it so that it is legal to carry your gun around with you anywhere, if you have the special license. Some areas such as public buildings, schools, etc. guns are banend from. You otherwise have to have a sign by the entrance stating that guns are banned on the premisis. I'd say just repeal the law alltogether, but to make it fair to those who do concel and carry, it should be something along the lines of, guns are banned everywhere, except where the building/property owner signs up onto a list with the state government saying that guns are allowed to be "concealed & carried" on the premisis. It would then be up to the person with the license to know where they can go with thier gun, and where they can't go with it.

I feel safer with the conceal and carry. Even if I'm not carrying, I know that there are law abiding citizens out there that are... not just the criminals who tend to carry no matter what the laws say.

Personally, I think they should have conceal and carry in schools as well. Especially if you're a teacher and you work in the hood. I have a relative that teaches in Milwaukee and they have grade schoolers pull knives and guns on them. If teachers carried, you probably wouldn't have as many Columbine-like shootings either.

As previously noted, it's all academic for me as I couldn't carry a gun without being arrested even if I wanted to (but then if I did have a gun I'd have the upper hand seeing as the copper wouldn't have one).

FWIW I honestly do not see the need for members of the public to carry firearms.

Jase,

I've drawn mine in self-defense with about three steps between me and the man with the blade. At two steps, he would have been a valid target. Would that be considered "need." Do you consider criminals "members of the public?" They carry. Why should the law abiding citizen not have the same defensive measures as a criminal's offensive measures?

If the situation where you live is so bad that you have needed to defend yourself in this way, then yes I guess there is a need where you are. Personally, I've never been threatened nor do I know anyone who has been. Perhaps the reason why you find yourself in this position is because it's common in the first place for people to be carrying "defensive" weapons?

It is my contention that it is the culture of firearm possession which causes a lot of threatening positions in the first place.

Could you explain then why violent crimes are on the rise in Australia and the U.K. but declining in the U.S.?

Could you explain then why violent crimes are on the rise in Australia and the U.K. but declining in the U.S.?

Where did you get your info?I'd like to see it cause I don't believe it.
Considering per capita in each country I believe you can count those 2 countries murders and violent crimes to americas and it wouldn't even be close.Considering we get 40,000 murders year,U.K. and Australia don't even fit in the mix.They probably haven't had that many in the last 100 years combined.
I hunt but don't own one.Why buy one when I can borrow one?

E

I carry at least one sidearm with me at all times. I am very glad I have too. I was jumped at 3 AM back in January by a guy trying to jack my car with physical force. My Colt 1911 stopped the situation rather quickly although he did get me hit good once. He was promptly arested. Everyman should carry a gun its a lot of fun too! Nothing like going to the range and throwing some lead around!

the "victimisation risk" - showing the risk of suffering a crime - in England and Wales is higher for overall crime than anywhere else in Europe, and higher than in America. The same is true of falling victim to "contact" - violent - crime.

(from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... stid=50048 )

I don't know where they got their information or the veracity of it, but it is something to at least consider.

Should I answer the poll now or in a few weeks?

cfitz

More interesting reading:

http://www.unicri.it/icvs/publications/index_pub.htm

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/html/cjusew96/crvs.htm

Granted, America still has higher murder rates (although if trends continue that will eventually reverse as well), but in England, Wales and Australia are at the top of the charts in most all other categories. And rates have been going up in England, Wales and Australia while going down in America.

I have to admit I was a bit surprised to read this data myself. I guess I have to plead guilty to just accepting the stereotypes without checking facts.

cfitz

Thanks, cfitz. I just checked this thread and was like "oh man, its 2:00 A.M. and he wants citations." Then I saw you did it for me.

You're welcome, Jamie, but you didn't answer my question:

cfitz wrote:Should I answer the poll now or in a few weeks?

By the way, if you get a chance could you check your private messages?

cfitz

Will check ASAP. If you know your situation is changing (you are getting one or own one but are moving to California) vote the situation as will be more permanent.

By the way, I do appreciate you providing the information, it actually is upon him to prove that it isn't the case since he made the first claim.

"It is my contention that it is the culture of firearm possession which causes a lot of threatening positions in the first place."

This was after he was speaking about my situation in America dictating my needs and his situation in the U.K. which say he isn't subject to such a threatening position. So the logical inference from this statement is that since we were both speaking of violent crime, that America has a higher violent crime rate than the U.K. It is his claim to back up, not mine.

The few guns I own are ones reliteves of mine owned or in the case for one brought back as a souvenir.

An Arisaka Type 44 carbine.

I refuse to buy a firearm until they build in DVD Burners...

You gotta multi-task - shoot while you are burning that movie backup.

Ian - how about starting a DVDRgunlabs company??

The reason why the UK is suffering from much-increased crime levels (in a few inner-city areas it has to be said, in most of the country this is not the case) is precisely because our gun culture is on the increase, aided by a drugs culture which has been building exponentially over the last 20 years -- these two related problems are issues which this country have completely failed to tackle -- and these lie at the root of problems in the UK.

Legal or not, the gun culture is causing the problems, made worse by an ineffective police force, cut back by large reductions in spending and reactionary gimmicks on the part of government.

You have to bear in mind as well that the methods for reporting these statistics differ around the world; Interpol as much as say so on their websites, to the point where they cannot be realistically compared, only trends can be.

The USA started off with a larger problem than Europe, but has been more effective in the interim in countering the problem. The laws surrounding firearms were little different in either country in 1980 than they are now; yet at that time the USA had a much greater crime problem than the UK had. I certainly do not accept that the rises we've experienced in the last quarter of a century have been in any way tied to people not being given *legal* access to firearms -- I'd see it more as the US having less lessons to learn from the situation the whole western world finds itself in with increased violent crime, having had to deal with a higher incidence of it in the past due to it being endemic in the first place, and the UK being caught napping in effect, and lacking the political will to do anything about it until it starts becoming a real issue for the people.

Indeed, I shudder to think about what this country would be like had we had private firearms *as well* as the incompetence in government which has brought us to the position we're in.

Having said all of this, taking crime rates in non-inner city areas, in the US as well as the UK I'm sure, violent crimes against the person are staggeringly low. It is little more than pure paranoia to assume that if you stay out of troubled areas, that you may be mugged or similar.

You are misapplying "gun culture." Criminals do not compose "gun culture." They simply use them to achieve an ends. A "gun culture" exists with no real end goal for the guns other than using the gun. This would include target shooters, clay shooters, hunters, and so on. Criminals do not commit crimes just so that they can do something creative with their gun. Additionally, the rural areas you referred to in the US as likely having lower crime actually directly contradicts your point. It is in those very areas that US gun ownership is highest and "gun culture" is very high.

To be quite blunt, I think it is rude and presumptuous of you to think that such a blatant redefining of the term simply to support your unfounded and quite possibly wrong statement would go unnoticed. It is dirty logic, it is dirty argument, and I will nail you on it every single time.