Here is a genuine statistical answer.

The country with the most Crimminals and with the wealthiest individuals have the highest crime rates. I gaurantee you there will be a correlation !

If you really believe Gun Control works, maybe you should read THIS

And, look carefully at the crime statistics of cities that outlawed guns, Washington DC, Baltimore, New York, London, etc... I've been to all of them, most residents have bars on the doors and windows, cannot go outdoors at night without fear of becoming a crime victim, cannot park their cars in front of their homes because they will be vandalized or stolen.

When I was a youngster and in the U.S. Navy I had the opportunity to visit many nations. I got to see, first hand, homes surrounded by high, stone walls, the tops of which were covered with shards of broken glass embedded in concrete. I saw mansions surrounded by high, chain-link fences topped with razor wire. Essentially, these individuals were imprisoned in their own homes by that nation's criminal element. Guess what. The United States is headed in the same direction. Don't think this is true? Then it's about time you visited one of the downtown areas of a major city nearest you.

Good Luck,

Gary

I don't believe that the solution to crime and violence lies in gun laws, pro or con. What is needed is an attack on the root causes of these problems; poverty, poor education, lack of economic opportunities, weak family structures and lack of suitable role models. It also doesn't help when society (we/us) put such a high premium on having (to have) a cell phone, an Ipod, and Nike sneakers. What's a poor boy from the inner city to do? And while we're speaking in code ("to view some good crime first hand, visit a big city near you") why don't we just burn down all the ghettos and barrios and poof, problem solved. But wait, if we're willing to "ventilate" someone for trying to take our INSURED Tyros, what should be the punishment for the guy that robbed thousands of people, many of whom were elderly, of their entire life savings, sometimes totaling in the millions. But then again, I guess wearing an Armani suit while committing the crime gets you a pass (sort of). Apparently greed and criminal behavior doesn't know it's only supposed to reside in the inner city.

All I'm saying is, shooting one criminal is not going to deter another; never has, never will. I say, let's try to change the conditions that cause people to resort to criminal behavior in the first place. Plus, you won't have a string of dead bodies on your conscience; well thats assuming you have one (let's not forget those good Christian values . BTW, whatever happend to 'Thou shall not kill', did that get ammended? Repealed? Just curious.). JMO.

chas

Spalding, a robber doesn't WANT to kill you. He just wants your stuff. But in America, he HAS to use a gun... (old joke in America, not sure it's funny if you think about the ramifications, though: 'Never take a knife to a gunfight' ) because, just like you, he has to assume you MIGHT have a gun (and the right to use it).

Take all that away, make use of a handgun against a human a death sentence with no appeal, and watch all the criminals start stealing Tazers instead. And, like I said, let the Govt/ GIVE Tazers away in exchange for the guns. It won't change crime rates EXCEPT for murder. Now, if that isn't a sufficient goal to shoot for, pretty unimportant compared to your wallet being stolen or your car, then keep the guns by all means...

Where's the satisfaction in just Tazering a robber, anyway?

Dikki I love debating with you but you are completely nuts ��

1. If I bought a gun it would be for my protection, not necessarily to kill someone, if I wanted to do that I would simply join the army. (Of course I am being flippant , I have great respect for anyone that has the courage to defend their country)

2. A gun is a lethal weapon but it does not have to be used to kill, it can be used as a show of force. You have no idea what the intentions are or what the state of mind of a burglar (or burglars as they rarely work alone) is when they accidentally disturb a resident.

3. If by your logic, a burglar might already assume I have a gun or that if they disturbed me I might put up some resistance why the hell can��t I actually have one as that surely would just level the playing field. That��s the reasoning behind the saying ��never bring a knife to a gunfight��. To level the playing filed. Burglars don��t like level playing fields or they would simply knock on your door and tell you they want your things!! No burglar has anything to fear from me just because I may have a gun. I am not actively seeking out burglars to shoot them! However the burglar IS actively seeking houses to rob which puts me directly at risk as I own a house!! The burglar chooses which house to rob (I don��t choose for a burglar to come to my house ), he chooses whether to be armed or not (I cant ask specifically for the unarmed , wont hurt me kind ) and he has his choice of weapon (I cant ask to be robbed by only the tazer or knife wielding, or the guy that comes unarmed type burglar), and he has the choice as to how or whether he will use the weapon (I cant ask for the drug free just threatening type burglar). It��s only fair that the householder also has a little choice too surely?????

4. In America in certain states and other countries right now, the death penalty already exists. Why is there NO gun or violent crime in those jurisdictions by your logic? The greatest proportion of violent crime is linked to substance abuse whether that is under the influence or the desire to fund the substance abuse. And it is committed by habitually violent people who have a propensity to violence. Let me suggest that criminals generally have little regard for any legal sanctions generally and are not thinking about being caught when they commit their crimes.


This will be my favourite quote from you of all time.

��Spalding, a robber doest WANT to kill you, he just wants your stuff, But in America he HAS to use a gun �K.��

So why do robbers use guns in the UK Dikki ? I mean by your logic they brought a gun to not even a knife fight right? 6 Months ago my friend was robbed in the church car park in Handsworth Birmingham at gun point by a hooded youth and his accomplice. His car was stolen with his lap top and his keyboards and his house keys, wallet, phone and passes to the studios he works with. Did this youth HAVE to use a gun????? Did he get the gun purely to kill �K..?Or did he figure that a gun might come in useful as a show of force to prevent resistance? I reckon some thieves have got onto this genius idea that a gun might actually prevent resistance and potentially violence in most cases.

I think that they are right and I would use the same logic in my home if I owned a gun. If I am wrong then at least I would also have the means to try and protect myself and my family.

You see Dikki a robber may or may not want to kill me (like I said you don��t know their state of mind when they accidentally disturb you ) but I assume he may be prepared to kill me to take my stuff (which is a genuine fear) just as I may be prepared to kill him to protect myself.

A robber does not HAVE to choose to be a robber. He could choose to be a law abiding citizen just like the rest of folk. He has more choice than the choice to rob, steal and potentially kill or be killed.

All I am debating (in a friendly way) is the right for house holders to have some choices too.

Oh and Chas. The correct quote is you should not murder. The translation for the word ��kill�� is actually the word meant for unlawful killing. The Bible does permit lawful killing in certain circumstances like self defence or war.

While daddy is building an arsenal large enough to start WWIII little Johnny/Mary gets abducted by a sexual predator. Daddy just never had the foresight that a cheap whistle could've saved his little one.

------------------
Bo pen nyang.

[This message has been edited by Taike (edited 03-30-2010).]

nothing wrong with Daddy having a whistle too but they are really tough to shoot with....!!

i am kidding Taike and i take your point :-)however it does not negate mine nor those of the other posters.

That's why it's my book of choice whenever I need to justify some bulls--t. Ask ten people what any given phrase in the Bible means and you'll get at least eleven different interpretations. That's why it's never wrong. Just pick a cause or point of view and then find a nice biblical passage to cover your a$$. So what if you have to 'tweak' the interpretation a bit. Works for me.

But listen, you've made your point. I will NEVER attempt to burgle YOUR house. I don't want to get beaten to death with a giant Crusifix .



chas

Play fair Chas. You qouted the good book to prove YOUR point. I didnt.

still, you see how much of a deterent a threat of force is.....(i am just playing with you Chas.)

Play fair Chas. You qouted the good book to prove YOUR point. I didnt.

still, you see how much of a deterent a threat of force is.....(i am just playing with you Chas.)