Barack Obama, the lead Presidential Democratic Party candidate, is
for
banning all guns in America . He is considered by those who have
dealt with him as a bit more than just a little self-righteous.
At a recent rural elementary school assembly in East Texas, he asked
the
audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, he started to slowly
clap his hands once every few seconds, holding the audience in total
silence.
Then he said into the microphone, 'Children, every time I clap my
hands
together, a child in America dies from gun violence.'
Then, little Richard Earl, with a proud East Texas drawl, pierced
the quiet
and said: ''Well, dumb-a$$, stop clapping!'
Obama on gun control
Obama on gun control
hoppy;974753 wrote: Barack Obama, the lead Presidential Democratic Party candidate, is
for
banning all guns in America . He is considered by those who have
dealt with him as a bit more than just a little self-righteous.
At a recent rural elementary school assembly in East Texas, he asked
the
audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, he started to slowly
clap his hands once every few seconds, holding the audience in total
silence.
Then he said into the microphone, 'Children, every time I clap my
hands
together, a child in America dies from gun violence.'
Then, little Richard Earl, with a proud East Texas drawl, pierced
the quiet
and said: ''Well, dumb-a$$, stop clapping!'
And that is about the level of intelegence you would expect from the gun lobby - that of a child mistaking example for cause.
for
banning all guns in America . He is considered by those who have
dealt with him as a bit more than just a little self-righteous.
At a recent rural elementary school assembly in East Texas, he asked
the
audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, he started to slowly
clap his hands once every few seconds, holding the audience in total
silence.
Then he said into the microphone, 'Children, every time I clap my
hands
together, a child in America dies from gun violence.'
Then, little Richard Earl, with a proud East Texas drawl, pierced
the quiet
and said: ''Well, dumb-a$$, stop clapping!'
And that is about the level of intelegence you would expect from the gun lobby - that of a child mistaking example for cause.
Obama on gun control
That's right BM. Despite what liberal yuppie wine sippers say, Americans love freedom and their guns. Put that in your bong and smoke it.
Obama on gun control
Ha Ha!
-
QUINNSCOMMENTARY
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 4:56 pm
Obama on gun control
hoppy;974753 wrote: Barack Obama, the lead Presidential Democratic Party candidate, is
for
banning all guns in America . He is considered by those who have
dealt with him as a bit more than just a little self-righteous.
At a recent rural elementary school assembly in East Texas, he asked
the
audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, he started to slowly
clap his hands once every few seconds, holding the audience in total
silence.
Then he said into the microphone, 'Children, every time I clap my
hands
together, a child in America dies from gun violence.'
Then, little Richard Earl, with a proud East Texas drawl, pierced
the quiet
and said: ''Well, dumb-a$$, stop clapping!'
Your statement is not correct. While he may not favor open and unfettered gun ownership, he does not appear to favor banning all guns. In fact, from what he says here, his postion is quite close to my own. The following is his written response to a question about gun control.
Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting me about gun laws and the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue. Americans broadly agree that guns must be kept from those who may pose a threat, and that the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen should be protected.
We must work to ensure that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals or the mentally ill through an effective background check system. We also have to strike a reasonable balance between public safety and sportsmen's rights.
I will continue to work for effective gun laws, including reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that the last Congress allowed to expire, and effective law enforcement. I will also speak out against the culture of violence that traps so many of our young people.
for
banning all guns in America . He is considered by those who have
dealt with him as a bit more than just a little self-righteous.
At a recent rural elementary school assembly in East Texas, he asked
the
audience for total quiet. Then, in the silence, he started to slowly
clap his hands once every few seconds, holding the audience in total
silence.
Then he said into the microphone, 'Children, every time I clap my
hands
together, a child in America dies from gun violence.'
Then, little Richard Earl, with a proud East Texas drawl, pierced
the quiet
and said: ''Well, dumb-a$$, stop clapping!'
Your statement is not correct. While he may not favor open and unfettered gun ownership, he does not appear to favor banning all guns. In fact, from what he says here, his postion is quite close to my own. The following is his written response to a question about gun control.
Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting me about gun laws and the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue. Americans broadly agree that guns must be kept from those who may pose a threat, and that the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen should be protected.
We must work to ensure that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals or the mentally ill through an effective background check system. We also have to strike a reasonable balance between public safety and sportsmen's rights.
I will continue to work for effective gun laws, including reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that the last Congress allowed to expire, and effective law enforcement. I will also speak out against the culture of violence that traps so many of our young people.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." George Bernard Shaw
"If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody is not thinking" Gen. George Patton
Quinnscommentary
Observations on Life. Give it a try now and tell a friend or two or fifty.
Quinnscommentary Blog
"If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody is not thinking" Gen. George Patton
Quinnscommentary
Observations on Life. Give it a try now and tell a friend or two or fifty.
Quinnscommentary Blog
Obama on gun control
To be effective a law has to be enforced. We have more "effective" laws on the books now than you can shake a sitck at. IF they were enforced, that is. And that's the hook in Obama's fishing lure. What would be easiest and cheapest to enforce? All the gun laws we now have, or one law that would totally ban all private owned guns? And that is where Obama is ultimately heading.
Obama on gun control
It is illegal in Canada for anyone to now carry guns..........
but that doesn't stop them.
but that doesn't stop them.
Life is just to short for drama.
-
Snidely Whiplash
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:33 pm
Obama on gun control
hoppy;975080 wrote: That's right BM. Despite what liberal yuppie wine sippers say, Americans love freedom and their guns. Put that in your bong and smoke it.
I really like you're spunk....!!! Are you related in some way to Sarah Palin...??? Maybe a distant cousin down the line...?? :wah:
Yes Barrack, every time you clap your hands, someone is killed from gun violence..... But what you don't tell the people because your a Marxist socialist, is that every time those hands clap, 5 people have saved they're lives and protected they're families, property and business's from robbers, rapists, filthy gangbangers and murderer's......
Obama will try and take everyones guns if he gets the chance, it's just the far left liberal way, reguardless of what he says........ When was the last time Obama stuck to his word......? My god, now he's saying the surge in Iraq is a shining success, after years of calling it a failure and trying to cut off funds to the soldiers....
At this point, even debating what Obama says, or has said, or will say, is a bit too much like pouring a glass of water onto the top of a hill, and debating which side it will run down...........
I really like you're spunk....!!! Are you related in some way to Sarah Palin...??? Maybe a distant cousin down the line...?? :wah:
Yes Barrack, every time you clap your hands, someone is killed from gun violence..... But what you don't tell the people because your a Marxist socialist, is that every time those hands clap, 5 people have saved they're lives and protected they're families, property and business's from robbers, rapists, filthy gangbangers and murderer's......
Obama will try and take everyones guns if he gets the chance, it's just the far left liberal way, reguardless of what he says........ When was the last time Obama stuck to his word......? My god, now he's saying the surge in Iraq is a shining success, after years of calling it a failure and trying to cut off funds to the soldiers....
At this point, even debating what Obama says, or has said, or will say, is a bit too much like pouring a glass of water onto the top of a hill, and debating which side it will run down...........
Obama on gun control
"...assault weapons ban that the last Congress allowed to expire"...:yh_think !
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Obama on gun control
Bryn Mawr;975004 wrote: And that is about the level of intelegence you would expect from the gun lobby - that of a child mistaking example for cause.
Or mistaking a standard internet joke with the names changed to be truth.
ETA!!!!
Bryn, my comment wasn't in any reference to you. It was a general comment but might not have come off that way. I only meant I have seen this joke for several years now and it's not about Obama. I apologize if I offended anybody. Thanks to my friend for pointing this out to me.
Or mistaking a standard internet joke with the names changed to be truth.
ETA!!!!
Bryn, my comment wasn't in any reference to you. It was a general comment but might not have come off that way. I only meant I have seen this joke for several years now and it's not about Obama. I apologize if I offended anybody. Thanks to my friend for pointing this out to me.
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;975565 wrote: And self protection should not be a reason for having a firearm.
I disagree...I'm wondering why you feel this way...
Any person should have the right to do as they please...
I disagree...I'm wondering why you feel this way...
Any person should have the right to do as they please...
Obama on gun control
Hoss;975542 wrote: Everyone who gives them up if he's elected won't have them to protect themselves from the criminals who carry them, you can bet the criminals wont give theirs up.
I won’t give mine up, not ever.
the problem here is, you have to be practically dead before you shoot someone.............otherwise you are the one charged.
I won’t give mine up, not ever.
the problem here is, you have to be practically dead before you shoot someone.............otherwise you are the one charged.
Life is just to short for drama.
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;975565 wrote: god you guys go into a panic. I thought people who have the highest rate of gun violence and accidental shootings in the world would welcome new laws . We did it and we're a safer community for it. Anyone without a ligitimate reason for having a gun should give them up. And self protection should not be a reason for having a firearm.
Do you have intense written safety tests or courses that gun owners must pass before being registered? If you don't have even that then you have no business in owning let alone handling a firearm.
Honey I don't even own a gun but I totally agree with you. The NRA (National Rifle Association) owns half or more than the reps/congress people in the congress/government. Some senators bring up really great laws only to have them shot (no pun intended) down. It's a complete disgrace.
Do you have intense written safety tests or courses that gun owners must pass before being registered? If you don't have even that then you have no business in owning let alone handling a firearm.
Honey I don't even own a gun but I totally agree with you. The NRA (National Rifle Association) owns half or more than the reps/congress people in the congress/government. Some senators bring up really great laws only to have them shot (no pun intended) down. It's a complete disgrace.
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;975612 wrote: Okay Hossy wossy who does your constitution give the right to protect yourself from?
Probs the deer in his headlights:wah:
Probs the deer in his headlights:wah:
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;975618 wrote: Oohhhh hang on that could be dangerous .....................why do Hunters need armour piecing bullets if they shoot deer? It makes no sense!!!! Is the deer wearing a heavy plated bullet proof vest? Is he leaing against a tree holding an AK47 shouting out "I"M READY FOR YOUR ASS, COME ON LETS PARTY!!!:-5
Just run over the god damn thing and strap it to your hood. Saves picking the buckshot out of your teeth later when you're eating it.:wah:
Oh man, I've been saying that for years. Personally an Ak-47 woudl annilate the damn deer and what fun would that be? The hunter would have to look everywhere for the deer's body.
Just run over the god damn thing and strap it to your hood. Saves picking the buckshot out of your teeth later when you're eating it.:wah:
Oh man, I've been saying that for years. Personally an Ak-47 woudl annilate the damn deer and what fun would that be? The hunter would have to look everywhere for the deer's body.
Obama on gun control
Hoss;975542 wrote: Everyone who gives them up if he's elected won't have them to protect themselves from the criminals who carry them, you can bet the criminals wont give theirs up.
I won’t give mine up, not ever.
You're absolutely right Hoss. Area's around here have offered money for guns turned in...no questions asked. Of course almost all the guns turned in we're from permit carrying people. The crooks won't give theirs up, it'll make it so much easier for them to take over the country when there is a mandatory law to turn them in.
I won’t give mine up, not ever.
You're absolutely right Hoss. Area's around here have offered money for guns turned in...no questions asked. Of course almost all the guns turned in we're from permit carrying people. The crooks won't give theirs up, it'll make it so much easier for them to take over the country when there is a mandatory law to turn them in.
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;975647 wrote: Criminals are going to take over your country?.................................
What I meant by that, is gangs, drug dealers and convicts in general can be found in almost every city and town in America. If the every day people are required to turn in their guns, most of the law abiding citizens will comply. All the criminals that will keep their guns will know that people now have no way to defend themselves, and prey on the honest people that did what they were supposed to....obeying the law.
What I meant by that, is gangs, drug dealers and convicts in general can be found in almost every city and town in America. If the every day people are required to turn in their guns, most of the law abiding citizens will comply. All the criminals that will keep their guns will know that people now have no way to defend themselves, and prey on the honest people that did what they were supposed to....obeying the law.
Obama on gun control
hoppy;975080 wrote: That's right BM. Despite what liberal yuppie wine sippers say, Americans love freedom and their guns. Put that in your bong and smoke it.
Don't like wine - I'm a real ale man myself
So you think that a child's error should be used to determine government policy?
Otherwise, why the post?
Don't like wine - I'm a real ale man myself
So you think that a child's error should be used to determine government policy?
Otherwise, why the post?
Obama on gun control
Odie;975518 wrote: It is illegal in Canada for anyone to now carry guns..........
but that doesn't stop them.
No, but at least you can arrest the criminals on sight rather than having to wait for them to use their weapons
but that doesn't stop them.
No, but at least you can arrest the criminals on sight rather than having to wait for them to use their weapons
Obama on gun control
Snidely Whiplash;975534 wrote: I really like you're spunk....!!! Are you related in some way to Sarah Palin...??? Maybe a distant cousin down the line...?? :wah:
Yes Barrack, every time you clap your hands, someone is killed from gun violence..... But what you don't tell the people because your a Marxist socialist, is that every time those hands clap, 5 people have saved they're lives and protected they're families, property and business's from robbers, rapists, filthy gangbangers and murderer's......
Obama will try and take everyones guns if he gets the chance, it's just the far left liberal way, reguardless of what he says........ When was the last time Obama stuck to his word......? My god, now he's saying the surge in Iraq is a shining success, after years of calling it a failure and trying to cut off funds to the soldiers....
At this point, even debating what Obama says, or has said, or will say, is a bit too much like pouring a glass of water onto the top of a hill, and debating which side it will run down...........
Any evidence to back that up?
Yes Barrack, every time you clap your hands, someone is killed from gun violence..... But what you don't tell the people because your a Marxist socialist, is that every time those hands clap, 5 people have saved they're lives and protected they're families, property and business's from robbers, rapists, filthy gangbangers and murderer's......
Obama will try and take everyones guns if he gets the chance, it's just the far left liberal way, reguardless of what he says........ When was the last time Obama stuck to his word......? My god, now he's saying the surge in Iraq is a shining success, after years of calling it a failure and trying to cut off funds to the soldiers....
At this point, even debating what Obama says, or has said, or will say, is a bit too much like pouring a glass of water onto the top of a hill, and debating which side it will run down...........
Any evidence to back that up?
Obama on gun control
RedGlitter;975569 wrote: Or mistaking a standard internet joke with the names changed to be truth.
ETA!!!!
Bryn, my comment wasn't in any reference to you. It was a general comment but might not have come off that way. I only meant I have seen this joke for several years now and it's not about Obama. I apologize if I offended anybody. Thanks to my friend for pointing this out to me.
I did wonder if it was apocryphal but took it in the spirit in which it was presented.
ETA!!!!
Bryn, my comment wasn't in any reference to you. It was a general comment but might not have come off that way. I only meant I have seen this joke for several years now and it's not about Obama. I apologize if I offended anybody. Thanks to my friend for pointing this out to me.
I did wonder if it was apocryphal but took it in the spirit in which it was presented.
Obama on gun control
shelbell;975650 wrote: What I meant by that, is gangs, drug dealers and convicts in general can be found in almost every city and town in America. If the every day people are required to turn in their guns, most of the law abiding citizens will comply. All the criminals that will keep their guns will know that people now have no way to defend themselves, and prey on the honest people that did what they were supposed to....obeying the law.
Funilly enough, there are police in every city and town in America whose job it is to deal with the gangs, drug dealers and convicts and who are armed and trained to do it.
Whilst you cannot arrest a criminal for carrying a gun but have to wait until he's used it or is in the act of using it then the job of the police is far more difficult than it should be and the life of the law abiding citizen is thereby endangered.
Funilly enough, there are police in every city and town in America whose job it is to deal with the gangs, drug dealers and convicts and who are armed and trained to do it.
Whilst you cannot arrest a criminal for carrying a gun but have to wait until he's used it or is in the act of using it then the job of the police is far more difficult than it should be and the life of the law abiding citizen is thereby endangered.
Obama on gun control
BM and others. Some euro's exhibit what I call the "whipped puppy" syndrom. Your high mucky-mucks beat you people down enough times that, like a whipped puppy, you roll over on your backs and pi$$ yourselves, hoping to avoid another beating. All your spirit has been beat out of you, and much of your freedom stolen.
Americans stubbornly hang onto their guns, their freedom and are still proudly independent. We are slowly losing it all, thanks to liberal factory colleges, cranking out far left liberals faster and faster as more of our country becomes citified. Thank God I'll be dead before the worst comes. And thank God I got to live in better times.
Oh, yeah. The whole thing I posted was a email joke I got and passed on. Never meant it to turn into a war here. Lol.
Americans stubbornly hang onto their guns, their freedom and are still proudly independent. We are slowly losing it all, thanks to liberal factory colleges, cranking out far left liberals faster and faster as more of our country becomes citified. Thank God I'll be dead before the worst comes. And thank God I got to live in better times.
Oh, yeah. The whole thing I posted was a email joke I got and passed on. Never meant it to turn into a war here. Lol.
Obama on gun control
hoppy;975714 wrote: BM and others. Some euro's exhibit what I call the "whipped puppy" syndrom. Your high mucky-mucks beat you people down enough times that, like a whipped puppy, you roll over on your backs and pi$$ yourselves, hoping to avoid another beating. All your spirit has been beat out of you, and much of your freedom stolen.
Americans stubbornly hang onto their guns, their freedom and are still proudly independent. We are slowly losing it all, thanks to liberal factory colleges, cranking out far left liberals faster and faster as more of our country becomes citified. Thank God I'll be dead before the worst comes. And thank God I got to live in better times.
Thank you for the best laugh I've had in ages - absolute rubbish but a good laugh.
In the UK we have banned the ownership of all handguns - not because the government insisted on it as we rolled over but because the people insisted on it and the government rolled over.
As a result of banning the ownership of handguns we are a safer country and I, for one, am thankful for it.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-vict ... gun-crime/
Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in England and Wales is very low – less than 0.5% of all crime recorded by the police.
Facts & figures
The number of overall offences involving firearms fell by 13% in 2006/07 compared to the previous year.
Firearms were involved in 566 serious or fatal injuries in 2006/07, compared to 645 the previous year - a drop of 12%.
The number of armed robberies involving guns dropped by 3%
There were 13% fewer serious and fatal injuries related to gun crimes in 2006/07.
The number of reported crimes involving imitation guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07.
The number of reported crimes involving air guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07 over 2005/06.
(Source: Crime in England and Wales 2006/07; Homicide, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2006-07.)
Americans stubbornly hang onto their guns, their freedom and are still proudly independent. We are slowly losing it all, thanks to liberal factory colleges, cranking out far left liberals faster and faster as more of our country becomes citified. Thank God I'll be dead before the worst comes. And thank God I got to live in better times.
Thank you for the best laugh I've had in ages - absolute rubbish but a good laugh.
In the UK we have banned the ownership of all handguns - not because the government insisted on it as we rolled over but because the people insisted on it and the government rolled over.
As a result of banning the ownership of handguns we are a safer country and I, for one, am thankful for it.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-vict ... gun-crime/
Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in England and Wales is very low – less than 0.5% of all crime recorded by the police.
Facts & figures
The number of overall offences involving firearms fell by 13% in 2006/07 compared to the previous year.
Firearms were involved in 566 serious or fatal injuries in 2006/07, compared to 645 the previous year - a drop of 12%.
The number of armed robberies involving guns dropped by 3%
There were 13% fewer serious and fatal injuries related to gun crimes in 2006/07.
The number of reported crimes involving imitation guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07.
The number of reported crimes involving air guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07 over 2005/06.
(Source: Crime in England and Wales 2006/07; Homicide, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2006-07.)
Obama on gun control
Bryn Mawr;975719 wrote: Thank you for the best laugh I've had in ages - absolute rubbish but a good laugh.
In the UK we have banned the ownership of all handguns - not because the government insisted on it as we rolled over but because the people insisted on it and the government rolled over.
As a result of banning the ownership of handguns we are a safer country and I, for one, am thankful for it.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-vict ... gun-crime/
I doubt all that "rubbish", here we say "crap", and I return the laugh. You people are proof that brain washing works. And your facts and figures--just smoke. We have cities where strict gun bans are in place too. Stabbings, beatings and other violent crimes are on the increase. I would guess merry olde England to be the same.
In the UK we have banned the ownership of all handguns - not because the government insisted on it as we rolled over but because the people insisted on it and the government rolled over.
As a result of banning the ownership of handguns we are a safer country and I, for one, am thankful for it.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-vict ... gun-crime/
I doubt all that "rubbish", here we say "crap", and I return the laugh. You people are proof that brain washing works. And your facts and figures--just smoke. We have cities where strict gun bans are in place too. Stabbings, beatings and other violent crimes are on the increase. I would guess merry olde England to be the same.
Obama on gun control
Barack Obama, the lead Presidential Democratic Party candidate, is
for
banning all guns in America .Are you just pulling this stuff out of your ass or what ?
The following are Obamas Senate votes on gun related issues.
Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
for
banning all guns in America .Are you just pulling this stuff out of your ass or what ?
The following are Obamas Senate votes on gun related issues.
Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
I AM AWESOME MAN
Obama on gun control
Nomad;975968 wrote: Are you just pulling this stuff out of your ass or what ?
The following are Obamas Senate votes on gun related issues.
Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
The 2nd amendment does not ok seperate gun laws in ecvery freaking town. That's where chaos and confusion starts.
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
We have the laws. So, enforce them. He didn't invent that.
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Limit who? Dealers? Collectors who may purchase whole gun collections, as I have?
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Already have the laws. ENFORCE THEM.
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Honest people living in inner cities NEED protection too.
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
If an assault weapon fires ONLY semi-auto, it is and should be legal. Full-auto weapons are a whole seperate thing.
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
If semi-autos are banned, why more possession restrictions? Why ban semi-autos? Only reasons for that I can think of is Obama watched, and believed what he saw, in too many action movies.
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
Obama didn't want a lot of unemployed machinsts to his credit.
Obama come up short once again.:wah::wah::wah::wah:
The following are Obamas Senate votes on gun related issues.
Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
The 2nd amendment does not ok seperate gun laws in ecvery freaking town. That's where chaos and confusion starts.
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
We have the laws. So, enforce them. He didn't invent that.
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Limit who? Dealers? Collectors who may purchase whole gun collections, as I have?
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Already have the laws. ENFORCE THEM.
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Honest people living in inner cities NEED protection too.
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
If an assault weapon fires ONLY semi-auto, it is and should be legal. Full-auto weapons are a whole seperate thing.
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
If semi-autos are banned, why more possession restrictions? Why ban semi-autos? Only reasons for that I can think of is Obama watched, and believed what he saw, in too many action movies.
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
Obama didn't want a lot of unemployed machinsts to his credit.
Obama come up short once again.:wah::wah::wah::wah:
Obama on gun control
hoppy;975986 wrote: Obama come up short once again.:wah::wah::wah::wah:
I dont understand your reply.
You made the statement that Obama wants to ban all guns in America.
Ive supplied you with a list of his Senate votes contradicting your statement.
Do you have a rational response ?
I dont understand your reply.
You made the statement that Obama wants to ban all guns in America.
Ive supplied you with a list of his Senate votes contradicting your statement.
Do you have a rational response ?
I AM AWESOME MAN
Obama on gun control
Nomad;976070 wrote: I dont understand your reply.
You made the statement that Obama wants to ban all guns in America.
Ive supplied you with a list of his Senate votes contradicting your statement.
Do you have a rational response ?
And I don't understand your ignorance. Obama's a far left liberal. Read what you posted. Obama said nothing. Nada. I've seen liberals in action since I become aware of them and the anti-gun faction, at about 1950. Senator Thomas Dodd was rabidly anti-gun. He caused me to become a life NRA member in the 1960's. He's in the books, look him up. There are plenty more. They'll tell us anything to gain even a tiny foothold. Then it's more and more. One thing I learned about liberals. If their lips are moving, they are lieing.
You made the statement that Obama wants to ban all guns in America.
Ive supplied you with a list of his Senate votes contradicting your statement.
Do you have a rational response ?
And I don't understand your ignorance. Obama's a far left liberal. Read what you posted. Obama said nothing. Nada. I've seen liberals in action since I become aware of them and the anti-gun faction, at about 1950. Senator Thomas Dodd was rabidly anti-gun. He caused me to become a life NRA member in the 1960's. He's in the books, look him up. There are plenty more. They'll tell us anything to gain even a tiny foothold. Then it's more and more. One thing I learned about liberals. If their lips are moving, they are lieing.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;975612 wrote: Okay Hossy wossy who does your constitution give the right to protect yourself from?
Our constitution gives nothing. It only limits the role of federal gov't. The Bill of Rights is an acknowledgement of rights we have, and prohibits gov't from infringing upon them.
Our constitution gives nothing. It only limits the role of federal gov't. The Bill of Rights is an acknowledgement of rights we have, and prohibits gov't from infringing upon them.
Obama on gun control
Bryn Mawr;975698 wrote:
Whilst you cannot arrest a criminal for carrying a gun but have to wait until he's used it or is in the act of using it then the job of the police is far more difficult than it should be and the life of the law abiding citizen is thereby endangered.
I have to disagree...
You're placing your proposition based entirely on the fact that guns would be scarce in this country if they were illegal...Or at least scarce within the hands of criminals relative to now...
There is no doubt in my mind that guns would still be as abundant as now through underground black markets...
The US' borders are not like the UK and the country is much too big to rely on such a mandated piece of legislation...
"Assault" weapons(:yh_think) on the other hand I would not mind seeing banned as I do not feel many people, in relation to overall crime, get their hands on these type of weapons...Most gun crimes are committed with pistols...
Not to mention that underground black markets for guns would render weapons used completely and utterly untraceable...My logic is by at least having a gun traceable we can help to prevent crime by virtue of containment...Also I believe banning guns would increase the susceptibility of one having their house broken into...I know of people sent to jail for B&E and to think they'd do it in the inner city of Dayton is just quite simply imprudent to the point of ignorance...
No one can convince me that gun crimes will lower in the United States if they were banned...
One shotgun, one rifle, and one hand gun all with strict handling laws would be suitable for my taste...One offense and your rights are taken away with no chance of reinstatement...A test should be conducted payed in full upfront by a nominal fee orchestrated by very closely watched gun manufacturers whilst those with the right to sell them being subject to even more strict policy...
Anyone to whom's spent more than a year in jail above the age of 18 would have their rights to bear arms revoked...
Whilst you cannot arrest a criminal for carrying a gun but have to wait until he's used it or is in the act of using it then the job of the police is far more difficult than it should be and the life of the law abiding citizen is thereby endangered.
I have to disagree...
You're placing your proposition based entirely on the fact that guns would be scarce in this country if they were illegal...Or at least scarce within the hands of criminals relative to now...
There is no doubt in my mind that guns would still be as abundant as now through underground black markets...
The US' borders are not like the UK and the country is much too big to rely on such a mandated piece of legislation...
"Assault" weapons(:yh_think) on the other hand I would not mind seeing banned as I do not feel many people, in relation to overall crime, get their hands on these type of weapons...Most gun crimes are committed with pistols...
Not to mention that underground black markets for guns would render weapons used completely and utterly untraceable...My logic is by at least having a gun traceable we can help to prevent crime by virtue of containment...Also I believe banning guns would increase the susceptibility of one having their house broken into...I know of people sent to jail for B&E and to think they'd do it in the inner city of Dayton is just quite simply imprudent to the point of ignorance...
No one can convince me that gun crimes will lower in the United States if they were banned...
One shotgun, one rifle, and one hand gun all with strict handling laws would be suitable for my taste...One offense and your rights are taken away with no chance of reinstatement...A test should be conducted payed in full upfront by a nominal fee orchestrated by very closely watched gun manufacturers whilst those with the right to sell them being subject to even more strict policy...
Anyone to whom's spent more than a year in jail above the age of 18 would have their rights to bear arms revoked...
Obama on gun control
MAYBE THIS WILL HELP.
Britain, Australia top U.S.
in violent crime
Rates Down Under increase despite strict gun-control measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 02, 2001
1:00 am Eastern
By Jon Dougherty
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
Law enforcement and anti-crime activists regularly claim that the United States tops the charts in most crime-rate categories, but a new international study says that America's former master -- Great Britain -- has much higher levels of crime.
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations.
Twenty-six percent of English citizens -- roughly one-quarter of the population -- have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized.
The United States didn't even make the "top 10" list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.
Jack Straw, the British home secretary, admitted that "levels of victimization are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime."
Highlights of the study indicated that:
The percentage of the population that suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 percent, compared with 1.9 percent in the United States and 0.4 percent in Japan.
Burglary rates in England and Wales were also among the highest recorded. Australia (3.9 percent) and Denmark (3.1 per cent) had higher rates of burglary with entry than England and Wales (2.8 percent). In the U.S., the rate was 2.6 percent, according to 1995 figures;
"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.
England and Wales also led in automobile thefts. More than 2.5 percent of the population had been victimized by car theft, followed by 2.1 percent in Australia and 1.9 percent in France. Again, the U.S. was not listed among the "top 10" nations.
The study found that Australia led in burglary rates, with nearly 4 percent of the population having been victimized by a burglary. Denmark was second with 3.1 percent; the U.S. was listed eighth at about 1.8 percent.
Interestingly, the study found that one of the lowest victimization rates -- just 15 percent overall -- occurred in Northern Ireland, home of the Irish Republican Army and scene of years of terrorist violence.
Analysts in the U.S. were quick to point out that all of the other industrialized nations included in the survey had stringent gun-control laws, but were overall much more violent than the U.S.
Indeed, information on Handgun Control's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence website actually praises Australia and attempts to portray Australia as a much safer country following strict gun-control measures passed by lawmakers in 1996.
"The next time a credulous friend or acquaintance tells you that Australia actually suffered more crime when they got tougher on guns ... offer him a Foster's, and tell him the facts," the CPHV site says.
"In 1998, the rate at which firearms were used in murder, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and armed robbery went down. In that year, the last for which statistics are available, the number of murders involving a firearm declined to its lowest point in four years," says CPHV.
However, the International Crime Victims Survey notes that overall crime victimization Down Under rose from 27.8 percent of the population in 1988, to 28.6 percent in 1991 to over 30 percent in 1999.
Advocates of less gun control in the U.S. say the drop in gun murder rates was more than offset by the overall victimization increase. Also, they note that Australia leads the ICVS report in three of four categories -- burglary (3.9 percent of the population), violent crime (4.1 percent) and overall victimization (about 31 percent).
Australia is second to England in auto theft (2.1 percent).
In March 2000, WorldNetDaily reported that since Australia's widespread gun ban, violent crime had increased in the country.
WND reported that, although lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation's crime statistics tell a different story:
Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent.
In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent.
In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily.
There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.
Britain, Australia top U.S.
in violent crime
Rates Down Under increase despite strict gun-control measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 02, 2001
1:00 am Eastern
By Jon Dougherty
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
Law enforcement and anti-crime activists regularly claim that the United States tops the charts in most crime-rate categories, but a new international study says that America's former master -- Great Britain -- has much higher levels of crime.
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations.
Twenty-six percent of English citizens -- roughly one-quarter of the population -- have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized.
The United States didn't even make the "top 10" list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.
Jack Straw, the British home secretary, admitted that "levels of victimization are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime."
Highlights of the study indicated that:
The percentage of the population that suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 percent, compared with 1.9 percent in the United States and 0.4 percent in Japan.
Burglary rates in England and Wales were also among the highest recorded. Australia (3.9 percent) and Denmark (3.1 per cent) had higher rates of burglary with entry than England and Wales (2.8 percent). In the U.S., the rate was 2.6 percent, according to 1995 figures;
"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.
England and Wales also led in automobile thefts. More than 2.5 percent of the population had been victimized by car theft, followed by 2.1 percent in Australia and 1.9 percent in France. Again, the U.S. was not listed among the "top 10" nations.
The study found that Australia led in burglary rates, with nearly 4 percent of the population having been victimized by a burglary. Denmark was second with 3.1 percent; the U.S. was listed eighth at about 1.8 percent.
Interestingly, the study found that one of the lowest victimization rates -- just 15 percent overall -- occurred in Northern Ireland, home of the Irish Republican Army and scene of years of terrorist violence.
Analysts in the U.S. were quick to point out that all of the other industrialized nations included in the survey had stringent gun-control laws, but were overall much more violent than the U.S.
Indeed, information on Handgun Control's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence website actually praises Australia and attempts to portray Australia as a much safer country following strict gun-control measures passed by lawmakers in 1996.
"The next time a credulous friend or acquaintance tells you that Australia actually suffered more crime when they got tougher on guns ... offer him a Foster's, and tell him the facts," the CPHV site says.
"In 1998, the rate at which firearms were used in murder, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and armed robbery went down. In that year, the last for which statistics are available, the number of murders involving a firearm declined to its lowest point in four years," says CPHV.
However, the International Crime Victims Survey notes that overall crime victimization Down Under rose from 27.8 percent of the population in 1988, to 28.6 percent in 1991 to over 30 percent in 1999.
Advocates of less gun control in the U.S. say the drop in gun murder rates was more than offset by the overall victimization increase. Also, they note that Australia leads the ICVS report in three of four categories -- burglary (3.9 percent of the population), violent crime (4.1 percent) and overall victimization (about 31 percent).
Australia is second to England in auto theft (2.1 percent).
In March 2000, WorldNetDaily reported that since Australia's widespread gun ban, violent crime had increased in the country.
WND reported that, although lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation's crime statistics tell a different story:
Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent.
In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent.
In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily.
There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.
Obama on gun control
hoppy;975726 wrote: I doubt all that "rubbish", here we say "crap", and I return the laugh. You people are proof that brain washing works. And your facts and figures--just smoke. We have cities where strict gun bans are in place too. Stabbings, beatings and other violent crimes are on the increase. I would guess merry olde England to be the same.
We quaint old fogies in merry olde England have a saying - if you start with a preconceived idea and then base your reasoning on guesses, you end up being right every time.
Like Hoss, I believe that swearing is a sign of a limited mind and a limited vocabulary and, to me, crap is a profanity that has no place in polite company.
You might have cities that have a strict gun ban - what you don't have is a society where guns are seen as unacceptable and the carrying of guns in public a sign of criminal intent. In a civilised society, there is no possible reason to carry a gun in an urban environment other than the criminal.
We quaint old fogies in merry olde England have a saying - if you start with a preconceived idea and then base your reasoning on guesses, you end up being right every time.
Like Hoss, I believe that swearing is a sign of a limited mind and a limited vocabulary and, to me, crap is a profanity that has no place in polite company.
You might have cities that have a strict gun ban - what you don't have is a society where guns are seen as unacceptable and the carrying of guns in public a sign of criminal intent. In a civilised society, there is no possible reason to carry a gun in an urban environment other than the criminal.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Obama on gun control
fuzzy butt;976183 wrote: OOPS fogot to quote ................Accountable.
That's what i thought. I've been on and seen so many debates about this and it always comes up the same . That the American people (the states) have the right to form militias, which you have (army resevre etc.) It doesn't mean you have the right to personally own any weapon you desire to pop off anyone who comes to your door step..
"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."
As I said, our constitution gives nothing. It only limits the role of federal gov't. The Bill of Rights is an acknowledgement of rights we have, and prohibits gov't from infringing upon them.
The Second Amendment to our Constution acknowledges our right to keep and bear arms. The beginning phrase is not a caviat. Nothing in the Constitution limits citizens in any way. That is not its purpose. Aim your phobia somewhere else because I won't address it.
That's what i thought. I've been on and seen so many debates about this and it always comes up the same . That the American people (the states) have the right to form militias, which you have (army resevre etc.) It doesn't mean you have the right to personally own any weapon you desire to pop off anyone who comes to your door step..
"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."
As I said, our constitution gives nothing. It only limits the role of federal gov't. The Bill of Rights is an acknowledgement of rights we have, and prohibits gov't from infringing upon them.
The Second Amendment to our Constution acknowledges our right to keep and bear arms. The beginning phrase is not a caviat. Nothing in the Constitution limits citizens in any way. That is not its purpose. Aim your phobia somewhere else because I won't address it.
Obama on gun control
hoppy;976196 wrote: The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.
Most murders by gun crimes are due to inner city street gangs...
You're just not going to keep guns out of their hands...
I can actually see the potential for banning hand guns in accordance to crime percentages...That's to say anyone within a 5 mile radius of a large city would be permitted to own a licensed hand gun whereas the rural areas limiting gun ownership to just hunting weapons...
Assault rifles should always be banned from hunting in my opinion...I know here in Ohio we're not even allowed to use any rifle of any sort...But I do believe everyone should have the right to own a shotgun or rifle for hunting and should be mandated by l;aw to house those guns in a safe...Fines should be enforced with an incremental increase of fines upon every random inspection...
Most murders by gun crimes are due to inner city street gangs...
You're just not going to keep guns out of their hands...
I can actually see the potential for banning hand guns in accordance to crime percentages...That's to say anyone within a 5 mile radius of a large city would be permitted to own a licensed hand gun whereas the rural areas limiting gun ownership to just hunting weapons...
Assault rifles should always be banned from hunting in my opinion...I know here in Ohio we're not even allowed to use any rifle of any sort...But I do believe everyone should have the right to own a shotgun or rifle for hunting and should be mandated by l;aw to house those guns in a safe...Fines should be enforced with an incremental increase of fines upon every random inspection...
Obama on gun control
Bryn Mawr;976278 wrote: We quaint old fogies in merry olde England have a saying - if you start with a preconceived idea and then base your reasoning on guesses, you end up being right every time.
Like Hoss, I believe that swearing is a sign of a limited mind and a limited vocabulary and, to me, crap is a profanity that has no place in polite company.
You might have cities that have a strict gun ban - what you don't have is a society where guns are seen as unacceptable and the carrying of guns in public a sign of criminal intent. In a civilised society, there is no possible reason to carry a gun in an urban environment other than the criminal.
In case ya missed it.
Britain, Australia top U.S.
in violent crime
Rates Down Under increase despite strict gun-control measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Jon Dougherty
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
Law enforcement and anti-crime activists regularly claim that the United States tops the charts in most crime-rate categories, but a new international study says that America's former master -- Great Britain -- has much higher levels of crime.
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations.
Twenty-six percent of English citizens -- roughly one-quarter of the population -- have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized.
The United States didn't even make the "top 10" list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.
Jack Straw, the British home secretary, admitted that "levels of victimization are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime."
Highlights of the study indicated that:
The percentage of the population that suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 percent, compared with 1.9 percent in the United States and 0.4 percent in Japan.
Burglary rates in England and Wales were also among the highest recorded. Australia (3.9 percent) and Denmark (3.1 per cent) had higher rates of burglary with entry than England and Wales (2.8 percent). In the U.S., the rate was 2.6 percent, according to 1995 figures;
"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.
England and Wales also led in automobile thefts. More than 2.5 percent of the population had been victimized by car theft, followed by 2.1 percent in Australia and 1.9 percent in France. Again, the U.S. was not listed among the "top 10" nations.
The study found that Australia led in burglary rates, with nearly 4 percent of the population having been victimized by a burglary. Denmark was second with 3.1 percent; the U.S. was listed eighth at about 1.8 percent.
Interestingly, the study found that one of the lowest victimization rates -- just 15 percent overall -- occurred in Northern Ireland, home of the Irish Republican Army and scene of years of terrorist violence.
Analysts in the U.S. were quick to point out that all of the other industrialized nations included in the survey had stringent gun-control laws, but were overall much more violent than the U.S.
Indeed, information on Handgun Control's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence website actually praises Australia and attempts to portray Australia as a much safer country following strict gun-control measures passed by lawmakers in 1996.
"The next time a credulous friend or acquaintance tells you that Australia actually suffered more crime when they got tougher on guns ... offer him a Foster's, and tell him the facts," the CPHV site says.
"In 1998, the rate at which firearms were used in murder, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and armed robbery went down. In that year, the last for which statistics are available, the number of murders involving a firearm declined to its lowest point in four years," says CPHV.
However, the International Crime Victims Survey notes that overall crime victimization Down Under rose from 27.8 percent of the population in 1988, to 28.6 percent in 1991 to over 30 percent in 1999.
Advocates of less gun control in the U.S. say the drop in gun murder rates was more than offset by the overall victimization increase. Also, they note that Australia leads the ICVS report in three of four categories -- burglary (3.9 percent of the population), violent crime (4.1 percent) and overall victimization (about 31 percent).
Australia is second to England in auto theft (2.1 percent).
In March 2000, WorldNetDaily reported that since Australia's widespread gun ban, violent crime had increased in the country.
WND reported that, although lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation's crime statistics tell a different story:
Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent.
In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent.
In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily.
There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.
Like Hoss, I believe that swearing is a sign of a limited mind and a limited vocabulary and, to me, crap is a profanity that has no place in polite company.
You might have cities that have a strict gun ban - what you don't have is a society where guns are seen as unacceptable and the carrying of guns in public a sign of criminal intent. In a civilised society, there is no possible reason to carry a gun in an urban environment other than the criminal.
In case ya missed it.
Britain, Australia top U.S.
in violent crime
Rates Down Under increase despite strict gun-control measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Jon Dougherty
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
Law enforcement and anti-crime activists regularly claim that the United States tops the charts in most crime-rate categories, but a new international study says that America's former master -- Great Britain -- has much higher levels of crime.
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations.
Twenty-six percent of English citizens -- roughly one-quarter of the population -- have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized.
The United States didn't even make the "top 10" list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.
Jack Straw, the British home secretary, admitted that "levels of victimization are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime."
Highlights of the study indicated that:
The percentage of the population that suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 percent, compared with 1.9 percent in the United States and 0.4 percent in Japan.
Burglary rates in England and Wales were also among the highest recorded. Australia (3.9 percent) and Denmark (3.1 per cent) had higher rates of burglary with entry than England and Wales (2.8 percent). In the U.S., the rate was 2.6 percent, according to 1995 figures;
"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.
England and Wales also led in automobile thefts. More than 2.5 percent of the population had been victimized by car theft, followed by 2.1 percent in Australia and 1.9 percent in France. Again, the U.S. was not listed among the "top 10" nations.
The study found that Australia led in burglary rates, with nearly 4 percent of the population having been victimized by a burglary. Denmark was second with 3.1 percent; the U.S. was listed eighth at about 1.8 percent.
Interestingly, the study found that one of the lowest victimization rates -- just 15 percent overall -- occurred in Northern Ireland, home of the Irish Republican Army and scene of years of terrorist violence.
Analysts in the U.S. were quick to point out that all of the other industrialized nations included in the survey had stringent gun-control laws, but were overall much more violent than the U.S.
Indeed, information on Handgun Control's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence website actually praises Australia and attempts to portray Australia as a much safer country following strict gun-control measures passed by lawmakers in 1996.
"The next time a credulous friend or acquaintance tells you that Australia actually suffered more crime when they got tougher on guns ... offer him a Foster's, and tell him the facts," the CPHV site says.
"In 1998, the rate at which firearms were used in murder, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and armed robbery went down. In that year, the last for which statistics are available, the number of murders involving a firearm declined to its lowest point in four years," says CPHV.
However, the International Crime Victims Survey notes that overall crime victimization Down Under rose from 27.8 percent of the population in 1988, to 28.6 percent in 1991 to over 30 percent in 1999.
Advocates of less gun control in the U.S. say the drop in gun murder rates was more than offset by the overall victimization increase. Also, they note that Australia leads the ICVS report in three of four categories -- burglary (3.9 percent of the population), violent crime (4.1 percent) and overall victimization (about 31 percent).
Australia is second to England in auto theft (2.1 percent).
In March 2000, WorldNetDaily reported that since Australia's widespread gun ban, violent crime had increased in the country.
WND reported that, although lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation's crime statistics tell a different story:
Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent.
In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent.
In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily.
There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.
Obama on gun control
Bryn Mawr;976278 wrote:
You might have cities that have a strict gun ban - what you don't have is a society where guns are seen as unacceptable and the carrying of guns in public a sign of criminal intent. In a civilised society, there is no possible reason to carry a gun in an urban environment other than the criminal.
The emphasis being a cluster of criminals all carrying guns...
Hypothetically speaking upon the knowledge of your own demise being inevitable: Would you rather die upon being assaulted or kill that person trying to kill you?...
You might have cities that have a strict gun ban - what you don't have is a society where guns are seen as unacceptable and the carrying of guns in public a sign of criminal intent. In a civilised society, there is no possible reason to carry a gun in an urban environment other than the criminal.
The emphasis being a cluster of criminals all carrying guns...
Hypothetically speaking upon the knowledge of your own demise being inevitable: Would you rather die upon being assaulted or kill that person trying to kill you?...
Obama on gun control
K.Snyder;976173 wrote: I have to disagree...
You're placing your proposition based entirely on the fact that guns would be scarce in this country if they were illegal...Or at least scarce within the hands of criminals relative to now...
There is no doubt in my mind that guns would still be as abundant as now through underground black markets...
The US' borders are not like the UK and the country is much too big to rely on such a mandated piece of legislation...
"Assault" weapons(:yh_think) on the other hand I would not mind seeing banned as I do not feel many people, in relation to overall crime, get their hands on these type of weapons...Most gun crimes are committed with pistols...
Not to mention that underground black markets for guns would render weapons used completely and utterly untraceable...My logic is by at least having a gun traceable we can help to prevent crime by virtue of containment...Also I believe banning guns would increase the susceptibility of one having their house broken into...I know of people sent to jail for B&E and to think they'd do it in the inner city of Dayton is just quite simply imprudent to the point of ignorance...
No one can convince me that gun crimes will lower in the United States if they were banned...
One shotgun, one rifle, and one hand gun all with strict handling laws would be suitable for my taste...One offense and your rights are taken away with no chance of reinstatement...A test should be conducted payed in full upfront by a nominal fee orchestrated by very closely watched gun manufacturers whilst those with the right to sell them being subject to even more strict policy...
Anyone to whom's spent more than a year in jail above the age of 18 would have their rights to bear arms revoked...
I would say that my original statement is a no-brainer :-
Whilst you cannot arrest a criminal for carrying a gun but have to wait until he's used it or is in the act of using it then the job of the police is far more difficult than it should be and the life of the law abiding citizen is thereby endangered.
A straight restatement :-
If the carrying of guns is illegal it is easier for the police to act against criminals who do so or plan to do so. If the police have to wait until a criminal has used or is directly on the point of using a gun then it is less likely that action will occur. The reduced likelihood of the police being able to act before the event makes the streets less safe.
Experience in the UK shows that the number of guns in circulation has drastically fallen and that this reduction will continue the longer the ban is enforced. This is now bringing dividends with the amount of gun crime having peaked and now being on the wane.
I live in the East End of London – one of the rougher parts of the country. Last year, in this area, there were 30,187 reported crimes, 6,625 involving violence against the person. Of those only 41 involved the use of a gun – would you care to quote equivalent figures for the rougher quarter of any major US city to compare rates?
As to traceability, we have a case going on here at the moment involving black market gun production (one guy in his garage turning out handguns) - the forensic evidence is no different for legit guns, his guns have been linked to 50 crimes over the past few years and it looks like it was the common source of the weapons used that led to his arrest.
You're placing your proposition based entirely on the fact that guns would be scarce in this country if they were illegal...Or at least scarce within the hands of criminals relative to now...
There is no doubt in my mind that guns would still be as abundant as now through underground black markets...
The US' borders are not like the UK and the country is much too big to rely on such a mandated piece of legislation...
"Assault" weapons(:yh_think) on the other hand I would not mind seeing banned as I do not feel many people, in relation to overall crime, get their hands on these type of weapons...Most gun crimes are committed with pistols...
Not to mention that underground black markets for guns would render weapons used completely and utterly untraceable...My logic is by at least having a gun traceable we can help to prevent crime by virtue of containment...Also I believe banning guns would increase the susceptibility of one having their house broken into...I know of people sent to jail for B&E and to think they'd do it in the inner city of Dayton is just quite simply imprudent to the point of ignorance...
No one can convince me that gun crimes will lower in the United States if they were banned...
One shotgun, one rifle, and one hand gun all with strict handling laws would be suitable for my taste...One offense and your rights are taken away with no chance of reinstatement...A test should be conducted payed in full upfront by a nominal fee orchestrated by very closely watched gun manufacturers whilst those with the right to sell them being subject to even more strict policy...
Anyone to whom's spent more than a year in jail above the age of 18 would have their rights to bear arms revoked...
I would say that my original statement is a no-brainer :-
Whilst you cannot arrest a criminal for carrying a gun but have to wait until he's used it or is in the act of using it then the job of the police is far more difficult than it should be and the life of the law abiding citizen is thereby endangered.
A straight restatement :-
If the carrying of guns is illegal it is easier for the police to act against criminals who do so or plan to do so. If the police have to wait until a criminal has used or is directly on the point of using a gun then it is less likely that action will occur. The reduced likelihood of the police being able to act before the event makes the streets less safe.
Experience in the UK shows that the number of guns in circulation has drastically fallen and that this reduction will continue the longer the ban is enforced. This is now bringing dividends with the amount of gun crime having peaked and now being on the wane.
I live in the East End of London – one of the rougher parts of the country. Last year, in this area, there were 30,187 reported crimes, 6,625 involving violence against the person. Of those only 41 involved the use of a gun – would you care to quote equivalent figures for the rougher quarter of any major US city to compare rates?
As to traceability, we have a case going on here at the moment involving black market gun production (one guy in his garage turning out handguns) - the forensic evidence is no different for legit guns, his guns have been linked to 50 crimes over the past few years and it looks like it was the common source of the weapons used that led to his arrest.
Obama on gun control
hoppy;976297 wrote: In case ya missed it.
Repeating it does not make it any the more relevant. Shall we compare like with like and keep it relevant to the discussion in hand - number of gun related murders, number of gun related crimes in general, that sort of thing?
Repeating it does not make it any the more relevant. Shall we compare like with like and keep it relevant to the discussion in hand - number of gun related murders, number of gun related crimes in general, that sort of thing?
Obama on gun control
K.Snyder;976298 wrote: The emphasis being a cluster of criminals all carrying guns...
Hypothetically speaking upon the knowledge of your own demise being inevitable: Would you rather die upon being assaulted or kill that person trying to kill you?...
I'd rather reduce the likelihood of my own demise being inevitable.
Hypothetically speaking upon the knowledge of your own demise being inevitable: Would you rather die upon being assaulted or kill that person trying to kill you?...
I'd rather reduce the likelihood of my own demise being inevitable.