Chimpy Chompy on 23/2/2009 at 08:04
Quote Posted by Koki
You would cut out pistols, with their effective ranges of 20 meters, and not shotguns and rifles?
I'm thinking in terms of, a pistol is easily concealed and thus the kind of weapon you hide under your jacket to go rob someone with. It just seems more a "dirty work" kind of gun.
Old and Cunning on 23/2/2009 at 08:19
Quote Posted by David
You can't compare the US and Mexico in that respect. You'd need to compare two countries with a fairly equal socioeconomic and geographic standing.
Oh, but I can. They are becoming more and more equal every day, LOL!
But seriously, Mexico's murder rate is not due to socioeconomics. It is due to the fact that the armed and determined criminals have gotten the upper hand over the by-and-large unarmed populace and partially armed constabulary.
jtr7 on 23/2/2009 at 08:21
I have little faith in drivers and pedestrians to follow the rules, as someone tries to get me to hit them on a daily basis, sometimes 7 times in ten minutes on my way to work.
It's not the guns, it's those possessing guns that tend to scare me, what with all the rampant lack of sound judgment or empathy I have to witness. There are good reasons to own weapons, and there are decent people who have them and are responsible, yet they seem to put more energy into protecting their ownership rights than seeking solutions to the killing. In the US, is the 2nd Amendment truly threatened? A basic part of our Constitution truly endangered? Little has been attempted to quell fears, and instead, they've been exacerbated. Address the concerns without dismissing them, and the threats to the 2nd Amendment will diminish. Common sense, as we know, is uncommon. Smart people still get over-confident, less vigilant, and forget basic prevention. I've had loaded weapons aimed at me by people who entrusted my life to the safety button. Sure, nothing happened, but the basic rules have always been to never point a gun at someone, even if it's unloaded, and never aim a gun at someone unless you plan on killing them. Too many casual slip-ups. If simple things like that cannot be enforced--these are the common flawed human beings, after all--then I refuse to accept any stance that claims millions of good gun owners can be trusted, when there's just too much evidence for mistakes. I don't get into cars with drivers that drive recklessly, and I don't want to be around people who don't have qualms about taking a life who happen to have a gun.
So really, quell the fears with actions, not words, and you'll see happier results.
Old and Cunning on 23/2/2009 at 08:25
Quote Posted by Muzman
Ignoring for a moment the absurd 'rock solid self defense tool' bit (written in thickly lettered black italics with a red stripe and a swooshy noise I suppose), and substituting "gun", er yes actually. But we did this already.
However this is all a non starter as you've established you can barely abide human company at all.
Ah Muzman, how quick you are to insult someone you don't even know. Maybe YOU're the one who doesn't like people, hm?
I enjoy human company as much as the next woman - but I reserve the right to pick and choose. And I absolutely demand that anyone who wants the time of day from me display civilized manners.
So much for conversing with YOU.
Old and Cunning on 23/2/2009 at 08:35
Quote Posted by Chimpy Chompy
I'm thinking in terms of, a pistol is easily concealed and thus the kind of weapon you hide under your jacket to go rob someone with. It just seems more a "dirty work" kind of gun.
But it's also much more practical to keep handy in the bedside drawer than a rifle - and a lot easier for us frail old ladies to use than a big, heavy rifle.
It's also far more appropriate for purse carrying. I think that it would be sort of awkward and offputting to men if the beautiful babe at the bus stop were carting a deer rifle around on her shoulder, LOL!
Muzman on 23/2/2009 at 08:36
Hey, I'm just working with what I've got. It's more fun to play your hyperbole straight. I wouldn't take it seriously either way, so don't worry. You still get the benefit of the doubt.
Vivian on 23/2/2009 at 08:38
Quote Posted by Old and Cunning
Mexico's murder rate is not due to socioeconomics.
That is possibly the most wrong statement I have ever heard in my life.
Old and Cunning on 23/2/2009 at 09:55
Quote Posted by jtr7
I have little faith in drivers and pedestrians to follow the rules, as someone tries to get me to hit them on a daily basis, sometimes 7 times in ten minutes on my way to work.
jtr7, I believe every word and that was my point, with all that itony. Why would people feel more fearful of gun ownership than they do of car ownership when car ownership poses a far greater daily threat to life and limb?
If we were really serious about protecting children from death by violence and accident, we'd be talking about a car ban, instead of a gun ban.
The answer, of course, is that so many people rely on cars, that the trade-off is viewed as acceptable, in spite of the carnage they produce. Except, perhaps, to the parents of the children who are killed by them on their way to school.
Guns, unlike cars, are good or bad depending on who is wielding them. I think he fact that guns are most often potrayed in film and TV as solely the tools of criminals gives people who know little about guns an unreasoning fear of them.
But if I have to face a criminal who is both stronger than me AND armed, I want something in my corner besides someone else's political agenda. And that is the unarguable upside of private gun ownership. There is no better personal defense available to most women and many men.
SD on 23/2/2009 at 10:05
Quote Posted by Old and Cunning
I'm sorry, Vivian, but you can't credit poverty with producing this kind of corruption and hypercompetitive savagery.
Dear me, of course you can.
Quote Posted by Old and Cunning
If poverty were a guaranteed indicator of higher murder rates, then Columbia and Jamaica would not be leading the world in murder rates and Indonesia would be among the highest rates, instead of among the lowest
Poverty itself is not a guaranteed indicator of higher murder rates, but it is a major contributory factor. Columbia and Jamaica might not be the poorest nations in the world - though they're pretty poor - but there are other factors at play in those countries, most notably the drug gangs that are a by-product of America's failed war on drugs.
Similarly for Indonesia. It's a fairly poor nation by global standards, but
relative poverty is what you should be looking at, and it's not massively poorer than its neighbours. Compare and contrast with Mexico, which borders the richest nation on the planet.