Are RPG's legal for a Civilian to own?
If not then why not?
If not then why not?
Shooting in Connecticut
- Thread starter D23
- Start date
- Status
As embodied partly by our stricter gun laws.
Do you think there would be as many psychos and homies in if society didn't preach the ethos of every man for himself, as the US does?
Now we're talking.
The stats indicate as you say, that the majority of gun homicides are due to handgun violence. The stats also strongly suggest as you say, that these are inner-city youth who perpetrate these murders. Gang violence, in effect. The fact is, controlling gang violence would be a much more effective way to reduce the homicide rate in the US, and by extension, presumably also the overall rate of violence. The thing is, that's still not enough.
This is a breakdown of the stats that you have linked to. As shown, overall rates of homicides from all types of weapons have declined over time, with only handgun homicides swinging wildly up and down over the years. This is an clear result of the effort to combat gang violence over that time, and that effort needs to be sustained.
However even in the most positive outlook, which is to assume that every single one of those handgun murders is attributable to gang violence, and that gang violence can be eliminated, that still leaves an unacceptably large rate of homicides in America. From the 4.5x greater rate that it is now (compared to the average of all other advanced economies), to 'only' 2.5x greater. In absolute terms, that would bring the US down from about 2nd worst homicide rate of all advanced economies, to 'only' 3rd worst (out of 32). Even in that rosy-glasses scenario where all handgun homicides are eliminated, they would still rank number one for firearm homicide rate.
So, there is more that needs to be done than merely eliminating gang violence.
Yes, Y causes X, X doesn't act on it's own. So if you're willing to look at causes, then how about what causes Y?
Last edited:
That is a very well stated point.
They claim to be such a "Christian" Country yet it's every man for himself.
They still can't understand the concept of Universal Healthcare. They call it Socialism.:lmao:
There wouldn't be, but that's the crux of the matter.. The amount of violence in their society is caused by that mentality and socioeconomic factors, not by the abundance of guns.
You stop at the point where the cost/benefit ratio is optimal. If you want to make a case that dogs, motorcycles, or alcohol are costing us more than they're worth then go right ahead and plead your case.
That is the argument against lax gun laws, and as far as I can tell the argument remains quite uncontested, despite all the yelling from the right.
Yes, by the abundance of guns too. It all feeds the ill mentality.
Ban men.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_San_Marco
In Americuh??
I think so
skip to 1:07 A rocket launcher, but close
[video=youtube;_UU4zYC1GgI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_UU4zYC1GgI#t=125s[/video]
There are various grenade launchers available for public purchase, though getting real grenades for them is a challenge.
What's next, you're gonna compare tactical nuclear weapons to a rifle? LOL
Surely if we can't own nukes then we shouldn't feel entitled to rifles and shotguns right
There are various grenade launchers available for public purchase, though getting real grenades for them is a challenge.
What's next, you're gonna compare tactical nuclear weapons to a rifle? LOL
Surely if we can't own nukes then we shouldn't feel entitled to rifles and shotguns right
Honestly I think our rights are being infringed upon where we are denied tactical nukes
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
I took a closer look at the Department of Justice Report on Homicides, and I am not convinced that any ban on guns in USA (like that is even possible) would change things much:
1. 49% of offenders were under 25 years old (p. 3) -- so maybe they should attempt to enforce safe storage laws as well as licensing and do not allow licenses to those under 25.
2. 78% of victims knew their killers and a lot of them were family (p 16). 2/3rds of spouse killings were with guns -- but without guns available, would these killings stop? Even in places where guns are not available, spouse killings still happen, and they happen often with a wide variety of methods.
3. About 4% of killings involved multiple victims. Less than 1% involved more than two victims (pg 24) -- so the whole issue of magazine size is barely relevant -- which is why I don't think that even if a magazine ban was possible that it would make any difference in the homicide rate.
4. Between 650 to 800 homicides were justifiable (pg 32) -- either people defending themselves or police defending themselves.
So, once you subtract the gang bangers with hand guns from the equation, once you remove the spousal or inter-family killings that many of which may still happen without guns (mothers drowning kids, dad's stabbing mom's, etc), and if you remove all of the justifiable homicides, what are you left with?
If you go the way Britain did and ban guns, what is next, banning knife sales like they have in certain areas to under 18s?
People kill people. In USA with their violent culture, Americans kill a lot of Americans.
Licensing may help to a degree provided you don't start a civil war trying to enact it. A total ban will never happen there.
On that note, I am departing this thread... it has gone on far too long with far too much silliness.
1. 49% of offenders were under 25 years old (p. 3) -- so maybe they should attempt to enforce safe storage laws as well as licensing and do not allow licenses to those under 25.
2. 78% of victims knew their killers and a lot of them were family (p 16). 2/3rds of spouse killings were with guns -- but without guns available, would these killings stop? Even in places where guns are not available, spouse killings still happen, and they happen often with a wide variety of methods.
3. About 4% of killings involved multiple victims. Less than 1% involved more than two victims (pg 24) -- so the whole issue of magazine size is barely relevant -- which is why I don't think that even if a magazine ban was possible that it would make any difference in the homicide rate.
4. Between 650 to 800 homicides were justifiable (pg 32) -- either people defending themselves or police defending themselves.
So, once you subtract the gang bangers with hand guns from the equation, once you remove the spousal or inter-family killings that many of which may still happen without guns (mothers drowning kids, dad's stabbing mom's, etc), and if you remove all of the justifiable homicides, what are you left with?
If you go the way Britain did and ban guns, what is next, banning knife sales like they have in certain areas to under 18s?
People kill people. In USA with their violent culture, Americans kill a lot of Americans.
Licensing may help to a degree provided you don't start a civil war trying to enact it. A total ban will never happen there.
On that note, I am departing this thread... it has gone on far too long with far too much silliness.
Now we're talking.
The stats indicate as you say, that the majority of gun homicides are due to handgun violence. The stats also strongly suggest as you say, that these are inner-city youth who perpetrate these murders. Gang violence, in effect. The fact is, controlling gang violence would be a much more effective way to reduce the homicide rate in the US, and by extension, presumably also the overall rate of violence. The thing is, that's still not enough.
This is a breakdown of the stats that you have linked to. As shown, overall rates of homicides from all types of weapons have declined over time, with only handgun homicides swinging wildly up and down over the years. This is an clear result of the effort to combat gang violence over that time, and that effort needs to be sustained.
However even in the most positive outlook, which is to assume that every single one of those handgun murders is attributable to gang violence, and that gang violence can be eliminated, that still leaves an unacceptably large rate of homicides in America. From the 4.5x greater rate that it is now (compared to the average of all other advanced economies), to 'only' 2.5x greater. In absolute terms, that would bring the US down from about 2nd worst homicide rate of all advanced economies, to 'only' 3rd worst (out of 32). Even in that rosy-glasses scenario where all handgun homicides are eliminated, they would still rank number one for firearm homicide rate.
So, there is more that needs to be done than merely eliminating gang violence.
Yes, Y causes X, X doesn't act on it's own. So if you're willing to look at causes, then how about what causes Y?
Yea, I'm weird like that but... I pointed out that mag limits were not the magic solution in all cases.
You said it's complete idiocy.
I don't agree with the complete part. Complete idiocy is thinking banning anything (while grandfathering them due to American property law) is a viable solution.
[wiggum] OK you bad guys, just keep your hi-cap mags in your homes and there won't be any trouble [/wiggum]
A mag cap could be a compromise for both sides. Something even the most extreme left and right could possibly agree on.
What would it change in the US fear factory?
Nothing, other than I can get back to buying what I want without a back order because every Jimmy Joe Bob flinched and went broke buying up everything.
Even that's fine because when I go to buy a new truck this spring I'll buy it from said redneck for peanuts because he's broke as a joke.
My opinion doesn't have to fall in line with yours for me to own guns.
and yet another shooting by a teen (though not in school). family dead.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/five-shot-dead-albuquerque-teen-charged-062002862.html
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/five-shot-dead-albuquerque-teen-charged-062002862.html
As you wish. What about the ignore list? Anything happening on that front?
If you want to assume that all handgun homicides are due to gang violence, that no other contries have any gang violence, that no other countries have justifiable homicides or domestic violence (as if that's an excuse), then it all amounts to making excuses. And then top it off by dismissing the remaining, excessive violent data as 'meh, that's just the way it is', then fine. So the US is violent and stupid and there's nothing that can be done about it, fine. Just be honest about it and stop making up arguments that gun controls have no effect on, (or are detrimental to!), to a safe society.
Your right, nobody needs a handgun. Not the police, military, politicians' bodyguards or criminals. But handguns exist and they are here to stay. As long as the previously mentioned groups of people still have handguns I expect to be able to own them as well. So, the same argument can be said for motorcycles. Nobody needs them. I'm sure there are many people who feel they should be banned. Do we ban everything that some other group feels that other people don't need?
Dont these people store their guns in a safe?
I guess anybody has access to them, even someone who broke in
Sent from my Phone, dont judge the grammar
- Status
