Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Minchia!

Fire Arms...yay Or Neigh

Recommended Posts

I've lived in a dozen countries over the years, including the US and UK (the two most dangerous). I found similarities in the levels of violence in both countries, although americans are generally deadlier... Interestingly, I lived in Guatemala through a "civil war" and it was safer than both the US and the UK, especially the first.

Anyway, it is true that there are many reasons why conflicts exist but, in my experience, there is only one reason why there is social violence.... it is allowed to happen. In some cases, the government does not have the capacity to enforce peace. In other cases, government simply doesn't or it only prosecutes some groups or some crimes. It boils down to the same thing, though, it is allowed to happen. In those countries where it is not allowed to happen, it doesn't or it happens comparatively less (much much less).

Maure - I agree with you (don't faint!!! :) )

As a Brit I can't help feeling a bit uncomfortable with some of the US responses on here - demonstrates to me the massive difference between our cultures. I'm (almost) 42 and once in my life I have touched a real gun and that was on a clay pigeon shooting event that someone had organised. I didn't particularly enjoy it, I was rubbish at it and feel no urge to do it again. Clay pigeons of the world can roam freely :)

I also am glad I live where I do - a few years ago we went out , left the front door on the latch by mistake and came back in the evening with the door wide open. I figured that the place would have been turned over, DVD gone, etc. Nope. It was as we had left it - no-one had even thought to go into the house. A short while ago I also left one of the sliding doors open on my car (I had been going in and out fetching stuff) and a few hours later the doorbell rang - the local young teenager (who always seems to be in trouble) and her boyfriend actually came round and told me the door had been left like that. I thanked them and again the car was untouched.

When I read therefore people disclosing how they have a gun in case an intruder has one (or maybe a baseball bat) I can't help thinking how lucky I am and how much I would not want to live where that is the case. Not me being smug - my point is (apart from the fact that my memory for shutting doors is crap :) ) I would not want to live anywhere where I had to have a gun.

The gun is the symptom of a deeper sickness - just listen to yourselves???

Edit typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's not the whole picture, Muzza. I will give you my perspective from a totally different country.

LatinAmerica is, as you might know, the most inequal zone on earth. The abyss between rich and poor here is unimaginable in Europe or America. Yet, even is crime is rampant around these parts, it is not proportional when compared to USA levels of unequality. Let's say that the difference in equality is bigger than the difference in crime rates (as a general rule, of course) You won't see many suicide guys walking into universities/malls and killing everybody on sight.

I have no idea why USA has such highlevels of violence but I think that you might be right with the "American Dream" thing. Is not that much about the actual situation of the person which dictates its violence, but more about the difference between what they were told they deserve and what they get. People here does not think this is a land of opportunity. Poor people lives in subhuman conditions, but nobody ever promised a golden future (at least, not recently). Americans are being taught the American Dream since the day they were born. Poor/misfit people must feel huge levels of frustration when they notice that it will never happen for most of them.

Yeah very good point Andres. This place (TF1) is good for getting perspectives from around the world. I'm sure there are loads of cultural factors that influence crime rates, and probably Kay will tell us this is something sociologists haven't figured out yet, but what you say about dashed hopes is no doubt one of the most important ones. I tend to think that inequality itself will lead to more crime too, for the same reason - people get frustrated when they see on TV or in other parts of town how the "winners" of society live. Also, inequality provides opportunity (somewhat ironically) to better oneself by crime: if no one were richer than you then you wouldn't gain so much by robbing them, for example. Because of the American dream, the USA suffers from both inequality and particular disillusionment as you say!

If I were an American (and I very nearly was), I'd keep the aspirational part of the American dream. Obviously you have to be realistic with what you tell people, but young people should be told that they can achieve big things. Imho the problem America has is that it doesn't enable everyone to achieve. The American dream is just that: a pipe dream. Europe is probably the best place to be if you want to go from rags to riches, though of course it is far from perfect here. It always interests me how the philosophy of the American dream leads America to follow policies that make it a pipe dream. The idea of individuals being responsible for their own success, a key part of the dream, leads to small government, which means poor people don't get a fair start, so they can never live the dream. I don't know much about Latin America unfortunately; would be interesting to know about the educational equality there relative to the USA or Europe.

Also I just checked on wiki for murder rates per capita and I think the public perception of crime in America isn't always accurate. America has huge levels of gun crime, and hence famous school shootings etc, but overall its murder rate isn't as big as we might have thought. The most recent figure for murders per 100,000 people are: the USA at 5.9; the UK at 2.03; Argentina at 9.47; Brazil at 27(!); Spain at 3.35 etc. Obviously the error bars on these will be huge, but America isn't necessarily as bad as we think. It's probably worse to live in London than a typical place in the USA.

I've lived in a dozen countries over the years, including the US and UK (the two most dangerous). I found similarities in the levels of violence in both countries, although americans are generally deadlier... Interestingly, I lived in Guatemala through a "civil war" and it was safer than both the US and the UK, especially the first.

Anyway, it is true that there are many reasons why conflicts exist but, in my experience, there is only one reason why there is social violence.... it is allowed to happen. In some cases, the government does not have the capacity to enforce peace. In other cases, government simply doesn't or it only prosecutes some groups or some crimes. It boils down to the same thing, though, it is allowed to happen. In those countries where it is not allowed to happen, it doesn't or it happens comparatively less (much much less).

How does Japan for example keep a low crime rate, if you've ever lived there? Compared to the US or UK I'm sure their government is no more capable of keeping the peace, and the criminal justice systems here and in the States certainly treat murder seriously. In this case are you talking about social pressure? There is something about Japanese culture that doesn't "allow" crime in the same way that we do in the West? Although I have many Japanese friends, we've never spoken about this, and tbh I never noticed much difference in respect for rules between us. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great replies!!

I really enjoy seeing both sides of an argument debated intelligently. It gives everyone perspective and better understanding of the issue, regardless of which side you’re on.

I think that Japan is less crime ridden because of the nature of their culture, not the enforcement of their laws. My brother lived in Japan for 3 years with the JET program and he commented on how polite and timid the local law enforcement was. Japanese culture revolves around politeness and saving face and honor. It’s just too rude to shoot someone. Now, there is the Yakuza, but even they live by a perverted “samurai code.”

The American Dream is not dead if you have the will to chase it. I am living proof of that. I am an Italian immigrant with no specialized education that was able to open my own businesses and watch them flourish even in this crappy economy. I now have 10 successful retail and food & beverage operations in one of the most premiere shopping centers on the globe (pat my own back). The American Dream is alive and well (even a moron can become president!), it is the American spirit that is broken.

Here's the major downer:

Sadly I believe that this hegemony is in decline like the end days of the Roman Empire. Life has become too convenient for our own good. The middle class is slowly evaporating as the gap between rich and poor ever widens. Corporate and political corruption is at an all time high, while education is always on the bottom of the governments’ budget. We live lives of excess here – excess food, excess debt, and excess consumerism. Deluded people pound their chest here, proclaiming, “we are the most wealthy, powerful nation on the planet!” Well, for the most part, we’re not. We used to be, but now this generation is riding on the coat tails of the greatest generation this country has ever seen. All of the innovation and determination and “can do” attitude that America is known for is waning. We either are unaware of this, or don’t care. The feeling of lethargy in the air here makes me sick. There is also a general lack of global awareness here that is frightening (particularly so because we supposedly live in the age of instintaneous information ala the internet). Our sense of reality in this country is dictated by 10 second sound bytes force fed to us by the media. I think it is this general malaise that exists in the US that contributes to the increase in violence. It is a form of social frustration. Either there has to be a major paradigm shift in this country, or I fear that we will fade away as only a shadow of a once great nation.

Man that was depressing.

Uhhh……

So did you see last weeks American Idol?????!!

:rolleyes::D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, it is true that there are many reasons why conflicts exist but, in my experience, there is only one reason why there is social violence.... it is allowed to happen. In some cases, the government does not have the capacity to enforce peace. In other cases, government simply doesn't or it only prosecutes some groups or some crimes. It boils down to the same thing, though, it is allowed to happen. In those countries where it is not allowed to happen, it doesn't or it happens comparatively less (much much less).

You are making me smile and laugh and smile. I agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How exactly do you intend to take down this guy after he shoots you in the head?

At least I'll die doing what I thought was right, and with my morals in tact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You think a baseball bat is going to accomplish much?

Maybe not, but if you play your cards right...

If the guy doesn't see you, he's ****ed. I took a guy down with a wiffle ball bat before. You just gotta be smart about it.

(I was about 12 when that happened. Some guy thought he was a big man, shoving a kid smaller than him, so I blindsided him with a wiffle ball bat one day, hit him in the middle of the back (he didn't earn a hit in the head), and he fell over. Took him a couple minutes to get up, too. Course, I wasn't the brightest; he was with a 260-lb guy who I clearly didn't notice. Didn't end well for me, but it was fun for a while...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At least I'll die doing what I thought was right, and with my morals in tact.

I could live with that and I see where you're coming from - but what if your wife and kids were still in the house? Your not going to be much help to them dead. Life is precious but the lives of my kin are more precious than anyone elses. So if I have to choose, I choose my family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could live with that and I see where you're coming from - but what if your wife and kids were still in the house? Your not going to be much help to them dead. Life is precious but the lives of my kin are more precious than anyone elses. So if I have to choose, I choose my family.

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could live with that and I see where you're coming from - but what if your wife and kids were still in the house? Your not going to be much help to them dead. Life is precious but the lives of my kin are more precious than anyone elses. So if I have to choose, I choose my family.

I understand it, it's a tough choice...

But it's pre-determined, for me. I'll never own a gun. I'm alright if some people want to and do, that's fine for them, but it's just not something I'll ever do. Just not how I am.

I guess I just hope that nothing like this'll ever happen. We live in a good neighborhood, never heard of anything like this happening near us before. Not saying it couldn't, but...

I really have nothing to back up my point with, though, other than I just don't feel right owning a gun.

But I will say this: I care a lot about my family. But the thing is, you can't say I don't care about them cuz I don't have a gun. My family didn't have any guns, so that's implying my dad didn't care about my mom and me and my sister and my brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand it, it's a tough choice...

But it's pre-determined, for me. I'll never own a gun. I'm alright if some people want to and do, that's fine for them, but it's just not something I'll ever do. Just not how I am.

I guess I just hope that nothing like this'll ever happen. We live in a good neighborhood, never heard of anything like this happening near us before. Not saying it couldn't, but...

I really have nothing to back up my point with, though, other than I just don't feel right owning a gun.

I understand and toally respect that. Tell you what, if you ever need to kill someone - just call me. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire arms would hurt and cause insane blisters and scarring, so I would say Nay (as opposed to saying Neigh, which would sound a bit like a horse which, if said in public, would probably offend one of my....large....fellow Americans). Now if we're talking Firearms, then I say 'Hell yeas'. The most fun is my black powder 1860 Colt pistol. Pull the trigger, hear the nice bang and smell like rotten eggs for the rest of the day. Good times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand and toally respect that. Tell you what, if you ever need to kill someone - just call me. :P

:lol: Sounds good. Think you can make it from Vegas to Boston in 10 seconds? ;)

Just for the sake of debate, I'll throw a few points out there:

Let's say I get a gun and I kill a guy with a gun who is invading my house. Guess what? I'm in prison. So, it's basically the same thing for my wife and kids as if I died trying to get him with a baseball bat: I'm absent. And it's worse for me; death beats prison any day. Now my wife has to be the mom, the dad, the housekeeper, the provider, everything all at once. So, I'm screwed either way. That slight chance I'll get the guy with the baseball bat makes up for it, and if I end up killing the guy, at least it'll be an accident.

Add that to the fact my wife would leave me if I owned a gun.

And then consider this: I'm going to raise my kids to know that violence is wrong. They may not know I even own a gun, but if I ever have to whip that sucker out, I become a hypocrite. Especially if the kids are at "that age"...then it turns into why am I allowed to shoot a guy dead, and they can't get in a fistfight on the playground? Whose to say I had a better reason for violence then they did, and after all, my act was more severe, so even if they do have a lesser reason, they were taking lesser action...Gaah, I'm too young and inexperienced for parenting. Fortunately I've got a little time...

Anyway, I'll respect anyone who has a gun, partly cuz I don't want them to shoot me :P and partly because if the law lets you own a gun, then I have no problems with you doing so. I can tolerate it, cuz not everyone's gunna think like me. And thank God they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fire arms would hurt and cause insane blisters and scarring, so I would say Nay (as opposed to saying Neigh, which would sound a bit like a horse which, if said in public, would probably offend one of my....large....fellow Americans).

:eyebrow: Droll, sir. Very droll.

:goldeneye:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also I just checked on wiki for murder rates per capita and I think the public perception of crime in America isn't always accurate. America has huge levels of gun crime, and hence famous school shootings etc, but overall its murder rate isn't as big as we might have thought. The most recent figure for murders per 100,000 people are: the USA at 5.9; the UK at 2.03; Argentina at 9.47; Brazil at 27(!); Spain at 3.35 etc. Obviously the error bars on these will be huge, but America isn't necessarily as bad as we think. It's probably worse to live in London than a typical place in the USA.

I was looking at your wiki reference and that seems quite inaccurate...

It says Pakistan has only 0-1 murder rate, but i now from a professor from Karachi (who was visiting my university) that since the polls started in June 2007 till about Novemeber 2007 there were atleast one suice bombing a week in pakistan... So i guess it depends on what qualfies to be a murder and suicide bombing should count. I guess deaths may be a more useful defination rather than murders....

btw, I think Eric's argument makes the most sense in my mind...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah good point Ankit. I did notice Pakistan myself and thought it was odd. But I guess the figures are more reliable for the USA and elsewhere that bombings are relatively rare?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow me to point out one thing.

Not everyone that owns a gun uses it to commit horrendous acts. Many of them use them for self defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Allow me to point out one thing.

Not everyone that owns a gun uses it to commit horrendous acts. Many of them use them for self defence.

Not me sir. I intend to go on a one-man holocaust! Hide yer womens! Hide yer childrens! I'ma comin' YEEEEEEEEEE HAAAAWWWWWW! :onefinger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

I'll admit I'm too lazy to read the whole thread ... But allow me to pull out my soapbox, and point out a few things ...

Statistics can be folded, spindled and mutilated (to the non-native-English-speakers, and any native-'murrican-speaker younger than Autumnpuma or I, I apologize) to suit any agenda.

Gawd. Gotta word this right.

First off, if you don't live in the U.S. or Switzerland, the issue is pretty much moot. SUI and USA share something that is, as far as my (admittedly) limited knowledge extends, unique in the world ... We have a right, that is guaranteed by the governing documents of the given countries, to bear arms.

If you can be bothered to spend the time, read the writings of the United States' "Founding Fathers". There is no doubt that they intended what we call the Second Amendment to the Constitution as an individual right. From a legal standpoint, from the basis of our own laws, it can't be questioned. The fact that it has been questioned is an issue of history and politics.

Now ... Let's discuss the Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There, as I understand it, private firearms ownership is pretty much outlawed. So, now, since the occurance of "knife-crime" is on the rise, knives are to be banned ...? Where does it stop? Sorry, sir, your chef's knife is potentially offensive...

Does anyone remember what existed as military hardware before the firearm? They were called "swords." (I'd be willing to bet that the sword is illegal in Britain.)

Do you happen to know what it takes to be skilled with a sword? Besides lots of practise? Strength. Now. Who were the "kings" in feudal and pre-feudal times? (Unless, of course, you believe in the "Divine Right of Kings"). Oh, yeah. The guy that could swing a sword effectively. So, if you weren't big, brawny and/or Roman, guess what ... You did what the government told you to do. Sound familiar?

So ... Now, we have governments (and their shills), telling us, the common sheeple, that we don't have a $DIETY-given right to protect our own lives, and that we must trust the government to protect us from all evils... Including the government itself.

But the U.S. Supreme Court, on more than one occasion, has held that the police have no obligation to "protect and serve." Their job is to investigate crime, not stop it ...

<asbestos-underwear mode='on'>

bring it on, kn0bs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a couple of thoughts . . .

On the defense from home invasion front - my brother in law was a police officer in the US for more than 20 years, and there were never unsecured firearms in the house when my sister was home alone. Why? Because in reality, even people like my sister who receive training and practice in the use of handgun almost always fail to pull the trigger when confronted by an intruder. If the person is lucky, the intruder flees, but there are way too many situations where the intruder, who is already perfectly comfortable with breaking the law, takes the gun, and at best, runs away with it, or at worst, uses it on the homeowner. And it was a common enough occurrence that he was never willing to risk his wife's life on that - and my sister is not a nervous or soft willed person (believe me, I wouldn't want to be on the business side of a confrontation with her...<g>).

And unfortunately, the US has been struggling with this ambiguous bit of 18th century legal language:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Without going into a long winded American history lesson, this amendment to our Constitution was written in another social era AND before the United States had a Federally organized military.

And Minchia!, I think you're right. The USA is starting to bear a VERY uncomfortable resemblance to the late Roman Empire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So ... Now, we have governments (and their shills), telling us, the common sheeple, that we don't have a $DIETY-given right to protect our own lives, and that we must trust the government to protect us from all evils... Including the government itself.

Although you have poked fun at the Brits, personally I'm happy that our Government have outlawed unlicensed guns. At least I am confident my family can go about their business without the threat of some nutter killing or injuring them.

As I have said before I don't share the gung ho attitude of some gun owners and happy not to live in a society where a gun is necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a couple of thoughts . . .

On the defense from home invasion front - my brother in law was a police officer in the US for more than 20 years, and there were never unsecured firearms in the house when my sister was home alone. Why? Because in reality, even people like my sister who receive training and practice in the use of handgun almost always fail to pull the trigger when confronted by an intruder. If the person is lucky, the intruder flees, but there are way too many situations where the intruder, who is already perfectly comfortable with breaking the law, takes the gun, and at best, runs away with it, or at worst, uses it on the homeowner. And it was a common enough occurrence that he was never willing to risk his wife's life on that - and my sister is not a nervous or soft willed person (believe me, I wouldn't want to be on the business side of a confrontation with her...<g>).

And unfortunately, the US has been struggling with this ambiguous bit of 18th century legal language:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Without going into a long winded American history lesson, this amendment to our Constitution was written in another social era AND before the United States had a Federally organized military.

And Minchia!, I think you're right. The USA is starting to bear a VERY uncomfortable resemblance to the late Roman Empire.

Interesting. Were you born and bred in the USA or did you move there later on?

Although you have poked fun at the Brits, personally I'm happy that our Government have outlawed unlicensed guns. At least I am confident my family can go about their business without the threat of some nutter killing or injuring them.

Exactly. Plus, anyone who reads this forum will be able to tell that nutters are few and far between in my green and pleasant land. :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow.

I'll admit I'm too lazy to read the whole thread ... But allow me to pull out my soapbox, and point out a few things ...

Statistics can be folded, spindled and mutilated (to the non-native-English-speakers, and any native-'murrican-speaker younger than Autumnpuma or I, I apologize) to suit any agenda.

Gawd. Gotta word this right.

First off, if you don't live in the U.S. or Switzerland, the issue is pretty much moot. SUI and USA share something that is, as far as my (admittedly) limited knowledge extends, unique in the world ... We have a right, that is guaranteed by the governing documents of the given countries, to bear arms.

If you can be bothered to spend the time, read the writings of the United States' "Founding Fathers". There is no doubt that they intended what we call the Second Amendment to the Constitution as an individual right. From a legal standpoint, from the basis of our own laws, it can't be questioned. The fact that it has been questioned is an issue of history and politics.

Now ... Let's discuss the Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There, as I understand it, private firearms ownership is pretty much outlawed. So, now, since the occurance of "knife-crime" is on the rise, knives are to be banned ...? Where does it stop? Sorry, sir, your chef's knife is potentially offensive...

Does anyone remember what existed as military hardware before the firearm? They were called "swords." (I'd be willing to bet that the sword is illegal in Britain.)

Do you happen to know what it takes to be skilled with a sword? Besides lots of practise? Strength. Now. Who were the "kings" in feudal and pre-feudal times? (Unless, of course, you believe in the "Divine Right of Kings"). Oh, yeah. The guy that could swing a sword effectively. So, if you weren't big, brawny and/or Roman, guess what ... You did what the government told you to do. Sound familiar?

So ... Now, we have governments (and their shills), telling us, the common sheeple, that we don't have a $DIETY-given right to protect our own lives, and that we must trust the government to protect us from all evils... Including the government itself.

But the U.S. Supreme Court, on more than one occasion, has held that the police have no obligation to "protect and serve." Their job is to investigate crime, not stop it ...

<asbestos-underwear mode='on'>

bring it on, kn0bs.

Well said.

And unfortunately, the US has been struggling with this ambiguous bit of 18th century legal language:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It's only ambiguous to those that wish it to be so.

This part makes people stumble: 'A well-regulated militia' and gives people the impression that it's saying we should regulate the use and distribution of firearms, or only use them in relation to a militia. Not so. The idea of a militia back then was that everyone would have personal firearms and, when needed, they would show up to a regulated command and form a militia..an impromptu army, if you will. At that point, the militia would be under the rules and regulations of a military command structure. The last bit about 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms' proves this out and states, without ambiguity, that personal firearm ownership is a protected 'right'.

Now as to why we need this 'right' today when we have an established military is made clear in the second part 'being necessary to the security of a free state'. This was put into the amendment to ensure the governed have a way to rebel against an unjust government. This is borne out by the phrase 'of a free state'. While it's possible that a foreign power might conquer us and take away our freedoms, this section mainly deals with the government itself taking away freedoms, much like England did to the American colonies.

Looking at the meanings of many (if not all) of the amendments becomes quite easy when you take them in the context of the American colony's rebellion against England.

And Minchia!, I think you're right. The USA is starting to bear a VERY uncomfortable resemblance to the late Roman Empire.

Actually, it would be far more accurate to compare the British Empire of the recent past to the late Roman Empire. If you're a student of history, you'll easily recognize far more similarities in that comparison.

Although you have poked fun at the Brits, personally I'm happy that our Government have outlawed unlicensed guns. At least I am confident my family can go about their business without the threat of some nutter killing or injuring them.

This is the height of naivete. Outlawing guns doesn't prevent death or injury, it just reduces the chance of a gun killing or injuring someone. Also, you're assuming that all the legal gun owners in, say, the US are going out there and shooting people. Not so. The vast majority of gun owners are safe and injure nobody. Instead of worrying over the legal gun owners, try worrying over those that have firearms illegally. This can happen in a society that allows or outlaws guns.

As I have said before I don't share the gung ho attitude of some gun owners and happy not to live in a society where a gun is necessary.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

--Benjamin Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...