The Futile Attempt of Gun Bans

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

Although it may seem hard for hoplophobic scumbags to believe, you can carry a loaded firearm in most states without a license.

Including California, as long as you stay out of incorporated city areas (and even then, as long as the gun is unloaded, you may pack it on your hip in Downtown Los Angeles. Not saying this is a good idea, but the law says you can).

If you have a concealed carry license, you may also open carry in 13 states, including New Jersey, Irish.

Where you can’t open carry is New York and the District of Columbia (no surprises here), Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas (which is a bit surprising, but these states do make it relatively easy to get a concealed weapon license.

Alaska and Vermont are the gold standard of Keeping and Bearing arms. In these states, you may carry whatever you want, however you want, open or concealed.

For a lark, compare the gun-related crime statistics of New York and DC to those of Alaska and Vermont. They are precisely what you would expect if you are not an idiot, and exactly opposite of what you would expect if you are.

102

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

For a lark, compare the gun-related crime statistics of New York and DC to those of Alaska and Vermont. They are precisely what you would expect if you are not an idiot, and exactly opposite of what you would expect if you are.[/quote]

C’mon now. Are you really going to compare Alaska and Vermont, which, combined, have about 58 people, to DC and NY, which are many times more numerous and also have ghettos that would make a hillbilly cry?

Not a fair comparison.

103

Personally, I don’t understand why a private citizen can’t have a weapon in DC. If I lived in Anacostia, I’d want a shotgun in my house, just for peace of mind.

104

Why on earth would I want to make a fair comparison? :stuck_out_tongue:

Here’s another unfair comparison: the state of New York has a population density roughly equivalent to that of Switzerland. The Swiss are bristling with guns (including fully-automatic assault rifles), whereas the New Yorkers are heavily restricted as far as firearm ownership. Care to guess which jurisdiction has more gun crime?

105

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Why on earth would I want to make a fair comparison? :stuck_out_tongue:

Here’s another unfair comparison: the state of New York has a population density roughly equivalent to that of Switzerland. The Swiss are bristling with guns (including fully-automatic assault rifles), whereas the New Yorkers are heavily restricted as far as firearm ownership. Care to guess which jurisdiction has more gun crime?[/quote]

Fair enough.

However, the society the Swiss have is different. Everyone is required to undergo basic training, and is considered part of the militia until age 30.

On top of that… I don’t think Swiss cities are like Camden or St. Louis, and I doubt that Zurich has a Bed Stuy equivalent.

Aside from poverty, which I’m betting NY has way more of, why do you think the rates are higher in NY, comparitively?

Slightly off topic, but they are not issued CCW licences unless they can prove that they need it (very similar to NJ’s laws on the matter).

106

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Therizza wrote:
Irish,

surely you know city folk don’t know how to use firearms!

hahaha. Tell them motherfuckers in Jersey City that.[/quote]

Curious. Here is a description of some of the most draconian gun and personal rights restrictions in the country (from: Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia ):

New Jersey

[i]It is the expresses policy of New Jersey legislative and law enforcement authorities that the carrying of a handgun on one’s person be strictly limited only to those earning a living through the carrying of a handgun. Thoretically, there exists a route to legal carry of a handgun by a civilian, but in reality, such is practically nonexistant.

In New Jersey, firearm owners are required to get a lifetime Firearm Purchaser card for the purchase of rifles, shotguns or handguns. To purchase a handgun, a separate permit is needed from the local police department for each handgun to be purchased and expires after 90 days. NJ law says that the handgun purchase permit must be issued within 30 days, but it is not uncommon for it to take several months to be issued. Capacities of semiautomatic handguns and rifles (total in magazine excluding chamber) are limited to 15 rounds or less. New Jersey also bans the use of hollowpoint ammunition in most circumstances. New Jersey has its own ban on various semi-automatic firearms as well.[152] Police are bound by the Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) in NJ and cannot own those firearms unless they are signed off by the Chief as used in an official capacity. They are exempt from the magazine limits when used in a duty/off duty firearm and approved by the department.[/i]

Yet, New Jersey has one of the highest crime rates (ie “Violent Gun Related Crimes”) in the country.

Aren’t these draconian measures of stripping the citizens of their firearms supposed to reduce these types of crimes?

107

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

Yet, New Jersey has one of the highest crime rates (ie “Violent Gun Related Crimes”) in the country.

Aren’t these draconian measures of stripping the citizens of their firearms supposed to reduce these types of crimes?[/quote]

To me, the issues surrounding our high crime rates are not directly related to guns. The people who the gun laws affect are not the same ones committing the violent crimes.

The bangers who use the guns out on the streets don’t give a fuck about a permit or a license.

If guns were not available, as in England, these statistics would drop. But guns are freely available on the black market, whether they’re coming in from other states or other countries or whatever, so you’re not going to see it drop.

NJ is the most densely populated state in the union, and the eastern part of the state is more or less one bigass city filled with immigrants, bangers, drugs, crime, and all kinds of other interesting shit. You’re going to have crime, and violent ones, one way or another.

The only thing is that I believe it’s easier to kill with a gun then by other means. I don’t mean skillwise- but it takes less to pull a trigger from five or ten feet away then it does to physically get in close on somebody and knife them. It makes violence more accessible to cowards, and I think a good section of the gun crimes are perpetrated by these types. Without guns, you would see less violent crime because, frankly, not everyone has the makeup to kill someone face to face.

Again- I’m not against guns. I like’em. And I certainly don’t think it’s worth the potential cost in terms of an unarmed society vs. a government with guns.

But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop.

108

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop. [/quote]

Do you honestly think a ban on guns would limit the availability of guns to those who don’t give a shit about the law anyway? And even if it does – which I can’t imagine any rational person thinking it will – the criminals already have their guns. The only people a ban affects are the ones who haven’t bought their gun yet, legally.

I guess people might think that a gun ban will lead to the Chris Rock scenario where bullets are rare commodities, but that’s not happening either.

The thing is, just think of all the stuff that is already illegal in this country and yet still so easy to get.

110

[quote]pushharder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

…But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop.

The statistics fly in the face of what you wrote. Gun ownership and violent crime are inversely related everywhere in America, not just VT and AK.

Gary Kleck. Google his work.

If you put a gun in every home in NJ that did not contain a felon overall violent crime in NJ would drop.[/quote]

Once again, I’m not arguing that. You guys are missing what I’m saying.

If it were possible to have guns completely eliminated, like taken off the planet and never produced again, murder rates would drop.

Nothing is as effective and easy as a gun.

111

[quote]malonetd wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop.

Do you honestly think a ban on guns would limit the availability of guns to those who don’t give a shit about the law anyway? And even if it does – which I can’t imagine any rational person thinking it will – the criminals already have their guns. The only people a ban affects are the ones who haven’t bought their gun yet, legally.

I guess people might think that a gun ban will lead to the Chris Rock scenario where bullets are rare commodities, but that’s not happening either.

The thing is, just think of all the stuff that is already illegal in this country and yet still so easy to get. [/quote]

They’ve done it in Great Britain. I have no idea how, but there were something like 57 gun deaths the whole year last year.

112

[quote]pushharder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

…But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop.

The statistics fly in the face of what you wrote. Gun ownership and violent crime are inversely related everywhere in America, not just VT and AK.

Gary Kleck. Google his work.

If you put a gun in every home in NJ that did not contain a felon overall violent crime in NJ would drop.[/quote]

The only problem with things like this are the same problems I see with gun control arguments. Mainly, a poor account of other sources.

Gun control advocates fail to account for other sources of obtaining a gun than of the legal variety.

I think research like this may fail to take into account other sources for victims. That is to say, preventing a crime and avoiding being the victim are 2 different things. If a town encourages gun use, do bad guys stop robbing people, or do they go to the next town?

Installing an alarm on your house may get your neighbor robbed, not prevent a crime. I probably need to read more.

113

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop.

Do you honestly think a ban on guns would limit the availability of guns to those who don’t give a shit about the law anyway? And even if it does – which I can’t imagine any rational person thinking it will – the criminals already have their guns. The only people a ban affects are the ones who haven’t bought their gun yet, legally.

I guess people might think that a gun ban will lead to the Chris Rock scenario where bullets are rare commodities, but that’s not happening either.

The thing is, just think of all the stuff that is already illegal in this country and yet still so easy to get.

They’ve done it in Great Britain. I have no idea how, but there were something like 57 gun deaths the whole year last year. [/quote]

Just curious though, what are overall murder/violent crime rates? Are people there not being mugged, or are they now just mugged with bats and knives?

116

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
But if guns were not around, violent crime would drop.

Do you honestly think a ban on guns would limit the availability of guns to those who don’t give a shit about the law anyway? And even if it does – which I can’t imagine any rational person thinking it will – the criminals already have their guns. The only people a ban affects are the ones who haven’t bought their gun yet, legally.

I guess people might think that a gun ban will lead to the Chris Rock scenario where bullets are rare commodities, but that’s not happening either.

The thing is, just think of all the stuff that is already illegal in this country and yet still so easy to get.

They’ve done it in Great Britain. I have no idea how, but there were something like 57 gun deaths the whole year last year.

Just curious though, what are overall murder/violent crime rates? Are people there not being mugged, or are they now just mugged with bats and knives?[/quote]

Knife crime rates are very high there.

However, not as high as the gun one here.

Push- people will not find other tools like you think. As I said before, guns make violence readily available to cowards- it’s much easier to kill with a gun by pulling a trigger then to close on a guy and actually stab him. Two different games.

117

[quote]pushharder wrote:
It’s funny. We’ve been over this topic a zillion times here on TN and the gun control argument never ever wins. It cannot win. It is completely void of any hope of winning. An impossibility. The argument is swiss cheese-riddled with holes. It can be and is vanquished with ease.[/quote]

It isn’t properly defended on this board- there’s a lot of like minded people here. Hell, the most we can debate over is whether people should carry them all time- I don’t think one person on this or any other thread has actually spoken out cohesively for gun control

118

Damn I really need a presidential pardon after reading this thread.