Re: Stupid Yanks
 

I did say "supposedly"...

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

They are capable of defeating the enemy, just not of differentiating between the enemy and their allies.

for the sake of accuracy, there were a large number of friendly fire incidents in the recent gulf conflict in which the Americans were either not involved (British against British happened a few times), or were actually fired upon first, and merely returned fire - unfortunately their firepower is such that any return fire will cause huge damage to the onther combatant.

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

You give me the USA's defense budget and I'm sure even I could win a war or two.

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

You give me the USA's foreign policies and I could start a few wars!

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

Exxxcellent .. together we could pretend to rule the world! (Funny how fantasy reflects reality sometimes)

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

*visions of George Dubya bush sitting on the carpet twanging his banjo and sucking on some straw..

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

1. Gun crime is falling in the US a lot. US DOJ website. and again. Interesting reading.

2. http://www.connected.gov.uk/facts/statistics/index.html

3. As Scastle has already said the vast majority of gun crime is commited by gangs. The same gangs that deal in drugs despite being them being banned as well. When you ban gun only the criminals have them. Peaceful law abiding citizens who use guns don't influence the stats enough, only criminal activity as a whole. You have banned guns, now what? Gangs are still using them, and getting them with suprising ease.

4. Can you imagine someone saying this? "If only I had a gun, he'd be so dead right now. All I have are these lousy knives, baseball bats, swords, and cars around. But if I had a gun i'd kill him."

5. If you were hoenstly trying to keep the debate civil, and meant no disrespect then I appologize. I felt a distinct tone of animostiy in your post, wether it was real or imagined. In that respect I think this will be my last post on it, so it doesn't go the way of others.

6. Are you calling me a troll Bifta?. I was hoping that (especially looking at my reputation) that people would think I wasn't trolling but voicing my opinions in a respectful manner and engaging in a fair and decent debate, even if my opinions do go against the vast majority here. I have always tried to moderate my posts heavily, not to try and inflame people.

But to answer your question, shooting guns is fun (IMO), hunting (other people think) is fun (and a really big industry), and of course self defence. Like the quote I mentioned before: Gun control: the theory that a 100lb woman should have to fistfight with a 250lb rapist. Even if I didn't shoot I would still support the right for responsible people to own and use guns. It is the same with hunting, and I will never hunt. It is as much a civil rights issue as well as a self-intrest one.

Noone has the answer. If anyone knew how to fix gun crime, then it wouldn't exist? And if someone knows something the governments of the world don't, then please share with us and pick up your Nobel Peace Prize. There will always be crime, always be murders, and always be people illegally using guns, importing and distributing them regardless of wether they are illegal or not.

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

I'll admit, I don't have time to go through those stats, but seeing as guns were also legal in 1993 when the figures were much higher, I see that as evidence of a reduction in crime in America, but one that doesn't necessarily have much to do with guns.


My point is that where guns are legally available, that ensures a greater supply of illegal guns for the gangs. After all, why would a gang member use a gun that is registered to them? They'll either buy a gun straight from the factory, or they'll buy one someone has nicked from a licenced gun owner.

That connected.gov link is interesting, it says the UK only has a gun problem in three areas, how many in the US?


Surely introducing a gun to an already tense situation would make that situation worse? I'll admit Rape is a bit more than a tense situation, but if the victim points a gun at the Rapist, it might make the rapist more likely to kill the victim?

BTW, I do respect your right to an opinion, just as I hope respect my right to a different one (or to argue with yours)..


But, I agree with you in one respect. I don't think we will ever entirely get rid of Gun related (or any violent) crime.

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

Sorry, can I just ask (you've mentioned it before) why do you keep on mentioning cars, baseball bats and knives for?

Knives have other legitimate uses, but cars and baseball bats are designed as a method of transport and something to hit a ball with.

While the gun is designed to kill. Okay some people might want to shoot holes in a piece of cardboard or a tin can, but that's what it was invented for, to kill.

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

If your average burgler thought every house he was going to break into had potentially armed owners, chances are he'd carry a gun with him, chances are he'd probably also shoot the occupants as the first sign of a disturbance. Hunting and recreational use of firearms should be licensed in the USA in exactly the same way it is in the UK, you can't trust an American with a gun, ask the British Army ;)

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

Chances are he/ she would also try to carry as big/ fast firing a gun as possible, this sort of weapon spiral is what puts semi and fully automatic weaponry on the streets :(

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

Hmm. And when was the last drive by shooting you heard about in the UK? I'm convinced they're pretty rare over here .. wonder why that could be? Probably because it'd be just a .. Drive by, and sorry, people just driving buy don't scare me ;)

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

I know you do but I am glad you said it. I respect everyone's opinions, and I don't think any more or less of you because you take a different stance on the gun control issue.

Because they can also be used to kill, along with 1 million other items. You can't just ban guns, pat yourself on the back and think you have done a good deed for mankind. Banning guns doesn't really seem to affect the murder rate, which is the ultimate goal. I have noticed looking at the stats that gun crime is more reliant of general crime levels, and fluctuate with it.

Yes, but criminals do already. Also noone ever said if you had a gun for self defence you had to use it. The way I see it, it is better to have gun and not need it, to be facing a situation where it might come in handy, and to not have one. People who wish to use a gun as self-defence are always at a disadvantage, because a homeowner would worry about being sued or going to jail. A burgular usually has no such worries. Noone ever said if you have a gun in your house you have to blow the hell out of anything that moves, but sometimes it helps.

If I honestly believed that a complete gun ban took the guns out of criminals' hands, then I would stand up for a firm ban. I believe even if it did, that the murder rate wouldn't change much, if at all, so where is the improvement?

Bush said if Congress requested an extension to the automatic weapons bill, he's sign it. But they never did. Automatic weapons are big, so hard to conceal, and the rapid firing makes them expensive and hard to aim with. People do think shooting is as easy as it looks. Fully autos are more of a status symbol than a practical weapon. At any rate a semi-automatic doesn't really fire much slower. and is much easier to aim with. Despite assault weapons being banned criminals seemed to get hold of them easily enough.

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

Computer monitors could also be used to kill?

Re: Stupid Yanks
 

Yup. By gun-banning we should ban them too.

It is myopic to think that gun crime is at the root of all murders, and that solving gun crime (which is actually a very generic term) will solve anything. It is the high rate of all murders we need to be solving, not just from selected weapons.