Gun laws

[celtan]

I think that was Bonnie and Clyde. Stole them from a Govt. Armoury (National Guard?). MGK carried the Tommy Gun (Thompsom .45)

BTW, the BAR had been around since WWI. US Soldiers weren't provided with it cuz' our Govt. was afraid that the germans would capture one and make copies of it. Instead, they were forced to use the french Chauchat, a piece-of-crap that seldom worked, even under ideal conditions. Thousands of "Yanks" needlessly died because of that decision.

I reside in San Juan, PR. Here we have the _toughest gun-laws_ in all the US of A, and also the _worst violent-crime rates_ in the Nation, comparable to Russia's.

Any criminal in PR can buy or actually "rent" an AK-47 on the housing projects, but a honest citizen can't own a flintlock family heirloom without a license, and if he's caught in the possession of an ounce of black powder, it's an automatic 5 year felony sentence !

Yes Virginia, it's true: The only ones who obey gun laws are the honest citizens, who wouldn't misuse guns in the first place. Those who commit crimes with them don't bother with the Law, it can be the toughest gun law in the Universe, and they would still break it.

There have been studies made on the performance of the anti-assault gun laws while it was on effect, and guess what? Zilch, no improvements whatsoever. It's just window-dressing for the PC minded folk. OTOH, states that allow concealed carry have lower crime-rates. Make your own conclussions.

I am in favor of gun control laws, but only those have prioven to be effective in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, and those unfit to own them.

Merry Xmas y'all!


: ) Manuel Luis

Originally Posted by clockwork

there are a cpl diffrent versions of the BAR from full auto to selective fire so it can fall under diffrent regs depending on the type that a person has. I believe that machine gun kelly used this weapon

[David]

Write yer congressman gentlemen. That always works.

[Atlantia]

Its such a tough issue isn't it gentlemen?
As you'll all probobly know, the gun laws in the UK are now some of the tightest in the world. I used to have strong connections with the gun owning (target range shooting) fraternity in the UK and the total ban on handguns seemed terribly draconian when it was introduced here.
Yes, some terrible crimes ARE committed with legally held guns, but of course most are committed by criminals with illegal weapons. In fact, in the UK the main 'legally held' gun that gets missused has always been the shotgun, and those remain legal because they have such a powerful lobby of users.
We now have a situation where even replica handguns are essentially prohibited.
Has it done any good?
Well, I have to say as someone who athough a lifelong weapons collector (now of course my guns are all relics) and essentially a pacifist who would never ever consider shooting a gun at anything more than a paper target, I think it has had a positive overall effect.
I think banning replicas and toys is a step too far, but I do believe that banning handguns (and nearly all semi automatic rifles) here, has made a difference. Certainly I believe it has affected their use in violent crime, for several reasons.
So was it worth the sacrifice of hobby gun owners?
Well, I would have to say that I think it was (And I say this for the UK as our situation is completely different from yours).

Although we do of course still have a problem with gun crime, it is certainly not as bad as it could be, or IMHO would be if guns were more a part of the British way of life. We have managed to move to a situation where most British kids grow up playing with toy guns, but have no experience of shooting a real one and certainly no experience of killing anything with one. Therefore, I do believe that guns are seen in a completely different way here. Obviously some people DO want to illegally own a gun, but thats a BIG step over the line, and puts you in a definate criminal category. I think this combination of fear of/lack of experience of/and criminalisation of gun ownership does mean that to most people here, the idea of having a gun or using one in anger is just not 'on the table'.

I wish there WAS a solution, simple or not for you guys. I fear that in the end there will come a moment where you have to sacrifice many of your rights of private gun ownership to begin a long term process of lessening gun crime.
I honestly can't see even the most progressive President starting such a contentious process when it will surely take many, many terms of office to show any real results.

I know I've drifted way past the subject in hand, just thought you might want to read the views of someone who spent a lot of time around guns then DID see them banned.

Sad thing is, of course its worth the sacrifce if it works! But where DO you guys start?

Peace all, don't 'shoot me down' for thinking gun control can be a good thing.

[celtan]

But that's the thing Atlantia,

Puerto Rico, Boston, New York: Extremely restricted gun controls (specially shotguns): High Crime Incidence
Britain, Spain, Japan: Extremely restricted gun controls : Low Crime Incidence (in native populations, inmigrants bring different values)
Ohio: Liberal gun laws: Low Crime Incidence
Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, likewise.
Los Angeles: Liberal Gun Laws: High Crime Incidence

So the crux is not gun control, but the local society mores behind it. In Britain, even drunkards at pubs are usually well behaved.

Draconian gun laws are not the answer. But some control is definitely needed, its only a matter of neither too much nor too little.

Best

M

Originally Posted by Atlantia

Its such a tough issue isn't it gentlemen?
As you'll all probobly know, the gun laws in the UK are now some of the tightest in the world. I used to have strong connections with the gun owning (target range shooting) fraternity in the UK and the total ban on handguns seemed terribly draconian when it was introduced here.
Yes, some terrible crimes ARE committed with legally held guns, but of course most are committed by criminals with illegal weapons. In fact, in the UK the main 'legally held' gun that gets missused has always been the shotgun, and those remain legal because they have such a powerful lobby of users.
We now have a situation where even replica handguns are essentially prohibited.
Has it done any good?
Well, I have to say as someone who athough a lifelong weapons collector (now of course my guns are all relics) and essentially a pacifist who would never ever consider shooting a gun at anything more than a paper target, I think it has had a positive overall effect.
I think banning replicas and toys is a step too far, but I do believe that banning handguns (and nearly all semi automatic rifles) here, has made a difference. Certainly I believe it has affected their use in violent crime, for several reasons.
So was it worth the sacrifice of hobby gun owners?
Well, I would have to say that I think it was (And I say this for the UK as our situation is completely different from yours).

Although we do of course still have a problem with gun crime, it is certainly not as bad as it could be, or IMHO would be if guns were more a part of the British way of life. We have managed to move to a situation where most British kids grow up playing with toy guns, but have no experience of shooting a real one and certainly no experience of killing anything with one. Therefore, I do believe that guns are seen in a completely different way here. Obviously some people DO want to illegally own a gun, but thats a BIG step over the line, and puts you in a definate criminal category. I think this combination of fear of/lack of experience of/and criminalisation of gun ownership does mean that to most people here, the idea of having a gun or using one in anger is just not 'on the table'.

I wish there WAS a solution, simple or not for you guys. I fear that in the end there will come a moment where you have to sacrifice many of your rights of private gun ownership to begin a long term process of lessening gun crime.
I honestly can't see even the most progressive President starting such a contentious process when it will surely take many, many terms of office to show any real results.

I know I've drifted way past the subject in hand, just thought you might want to read the views of someone who spent a lot of time around guns then DID see them banned.

Sad thing is, of course its worth the sacrifce if it works! But where DO you guys start?

Peace all, don't 'shoot me down' for thinking gun control can be a good thing.

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by celtan

But that's the thing Atlantia,

Puerto Rico, Boston, New York: Extremely restricted gun controls (specially shotguns): High Crime Incidence
Britain, Spain, Japan: Extremely restricted gun controls : Low Crime Incidence (in native populations, inmigrants bring different values)
Ohio: Liberal gun laws: Low Crime Incidence
Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, likewise.
Los Angeles: Liberal Gun Laws: High Crime Incidence

So the crux is not gun control, but the local society mores behind it. In Britain, even drunkards at pubs are usually well behaved.

Draconian gun laws are not the answer. But some control is definitely needed, its only a matter of neither too much nor too little.

Best

M

Hi Manuel,

Hmmm, I (formerly) worked in nightclubs for 10 years, and the British seem to drink for sport, as if it was an Olympic event and we are in training!
But as for behaviour, it seems to depend on the city/area.
Some places I worked are fairly well behaved, like Torquay! Generally very drunk, but overall good natured.
Portsmouth on the other hand, very drunk, and like the wild west, with fights quickly getting out of hand and spreading to half the pub/club.

All the towns I worked in had occasional stabbings, drunken glassings etc.
Very rarely shootings, in fact I've never seen one with my own eyes in 10 years. There were a couple, that happened at venues I frequented when I wasn't there, but they were very rare.

Thats because they are usually the result of premeditation and not 'impulse'.
I've known people who've been stabbed, and in fact had a kinfe pulled on me once when promoting a club, I've sadly seen many, many people get their faces and even throats cut with glasses, and god only knows how many with injuries from being kicked, punched or smacked with some stool or ashtray. I'm very happy to say that none ever actually died from injuries sustained in a club I worked in, but a couple of times I think it was close, and a guy I worked with was involved in a minor exchange of words with a guy in a pub who then asked him to 'step outside' and then stabbed him 13 times, leaving him critically injured.

My point is that as there are so few guns around, people don't impulsively settle scores with them (generally). I have NO DOUBT that if the people I've seen trying to beat each other senseless or slash each other with a broken glass or bottles had been carrying guns then I'd be recalling all the shootings I've witnessed.

Of course its a bigger issue than impulse arguments, in some British cities where the drugs problem is out of control, or where the kids all think they are 'gangsters' there are regular shootings, but mostly, violent disagreements between average hot headed idiots and even minor criminals are settled with nothing more dramatic than a few punches. sometimes it goes further, like I've mentioned above, but thats not the norm.

You are of course absolutely right that its the underlying causes and peoples willingness to use violence that needs to be addressed, and social factors area to area will of course affect the figures I agree.

But so also do attitudes towards weapons and their use, and a familiarity with guns and the realisation that many others around you are probobly carrying them with no good intention must certainly be a reciepe for more shootings.
I completely agree with your comments, but would add that if guns were routinely carried by more young men in the UK for defence/offence or whatever, then that would also directly (as your figures above show) corrolate to a slight rise in shootings in the areas which already have lower violent crime and a huge rise in those areas which currently suffer from lots of muggings/stabbings/pub fights resulting in actual bodily harm.

Yes, its the intent in the heart of the person that is the problem, but the more efficient the weapon the more likely the result is to be serious, and when drugs or alcohol are mixed with anger, desperation or addiction then the last thing you want thrown into the mix is a weapon that makes anyone a 'big dog'.
So what do you do? You have to weigh up the rights of peaceful law abiding citizens to own weapons against a seeming inability to cure the social factors that mean that if those weapons are also in the wrong hands they'll get used against other law abiding citizens.

In the UK, very few people really 'need' a gun. Certainly the vast majority of pre-ban fullbore firearms were owned for target shooting.

So the ban was hard on club target shooters and collectors. Especially smallbore sports shooters (Olympic hopefuls).

But if it helps alter the attitude towards guns in general, and makes them seem more socially unacceptable, then it can do some good.

Until we can fix the causes. That might be a long way off.


Regards
Gene

[clockwork]

I would like to point out that I have carried a gun for many yrs in and out of bars. I have been in many disagreements and have never pulled it out. I normally try to talk to the person or I will just leave the bar. I have been to gun shows were there was tens of thousands of guns and ammunition and tons of people drinking and have never seen a incident. So it comes down to a persons lack of self respect for them self’s and others in my humble opion.

plus I think that it also stems from lack training in proper use and the bad stigma that the media hypes up, also plays a part of it. My whole family has been raised around them and respects them we know what kind of damage they can inflict.

[David]

Originally Posted by clockwork

So it comes down to a persons lack of self respect for them self’s and others in my humble opion.
plus I think that it also stems from lack training in proper use and the bad stigma that the media hypes up, also plays a part of it. My whole family has been raised around them and respects them we know what kind of damage they can inflict.

What it comes down to really is that there are people who want to use these weapons to cause great harm to others. Many of them are very well trained in the use of these weapons. We live in a very dangerous time, when a few welled armed men with automatic weapons can terrorize an entire city and by extension, the entire world. Mumbai is only the beginning of a new style of terrorism that we can expect to see tried again and again. Can criminals and terrorists get a hold of these weapons illegally. Depends on how far and "draconian" the laws become. Probably, but i don't particularly feel comfortable with the idea that home grown terrorists in the States (or anywhere) could just stock up for their next attack at the local gunshow. I would rather see getting these weapons as difficult a procedure as possible. I would also rather not live in the wild west where "good" citizens carrying weapons gun down the bad criminal (and god knows who else might be standing by) because a cop isn't around. Let's face it, not every "good guy" who packs a gun has the kind of training necessary to use it in a public place defending himself against crime in a manner that guarantees the safety of those innocents who might be in the general area as well. They are not trained police or military. And if you lose to the criminal you might not lose just your life, but your friend's and/or family's lives, other innocent lives around you and more than likely you could put yet another hand gun into the hands of a criminal when he takes it off your dead self. Think you are faster/stronger/better than the criminal. Hey, they do this for "a living".
I am strongly in favor of a persons right to own a gun. You hunt, you target shoot, you collect, that's fine. But i see no reason for assault weapons and automatic weapons to be in the hands of civilians. But you collect such weapons? Sorry, the world is not the place it used to be. Public safety trumps my right to own something which can fall into the hands of those who would use it to do great harm. Am i being to PC? If so i don't really care.

[Atlantia]

Originally Posted by clockwork

I would like to point out that I have carried a gun for many yrs in and out of bars. I have been in many disagreements and have never pulled it out. I normally try to talk to the person or I will just leave the bar. I have been to gun shows were there was tens of thousands of guns and ammunition and tons of people drinking and have never seen a incident. So it comes down to a persons lack of self respect for them self’s and others in my humble opion.

plus I think that it also stems from lack training in proper use and the bad stigma that the media hypes up, also plays a part of it. My whole family has been raised around them and respects them we know what kind of damage they can inflict.

And bitter experience has shown me that confrontations (especially in bars and clubs) can be extremely unpredicable.
It is often those around the disagreement who escalate the trouble.
The other person in the group who comes back from the bar or toilet and seeing a heated discussion makes a bad judgement call (based on the alcohol content in their blood) and attacks the person arguing with 'their buddy' who is taken completely by suprise. They hit you, your friends join in, their friends join in..... and you have a gun on you! Can you see where that could end up?

You are probobly a completely decent law abiding chap, but I have to tell you that when you are helping to run a club and the final responsibility for the staff and customers (which can be a vast number of people) is all or in part down to you, the thought that one of your 'well behaved' customers would bring a loaded gun onto the premesies is absolutely terrifying.

Unless you are a uniformed Policeman in a country where they are routinely armed and the circumstances you mentioned were all during the course of your duties?