Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Banning guns has backfired

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CingularDuality
    started a topic Banning guns has backfired

    Banning guns has backfired

    Here's a recent article that I found interesting:

    Banning Guns Has Backfired
    by John R. Lott, Jr.

    Worried that even showing a starting pistol in a car ad might encourage gun crime in Britain, the British communications regulator has banned a Ford Motor Co. television spot because in it a woman is pictured holding such a "weapon." According to a report by Bloomberg News, the ad was said by regulators to "normalize" the use of guns and "must not be shown again."

    What's next? Toy guns? Actually, the British government this year has been debating whether to ban toy guns. As a middle course, some unspecified number of imitation guns will be banned, and it will be illegal to take imitation guns into public places.

    And in July a new debate erupted over whether those who own shotguns must now justify their continued ownership to the government before they will get a license.

    The irony is that after gun laws are passed and crime rises, no one asks whether the original laws actually accomplished their purpose. Instead, it is automatically assumed that the only "problem" with past laws was they didn't go far enough. But now what is there left to do? Perhaps the country can follow Australia's recent lead and ban ceremonial swords.

    Despite the attention that imitation weapons are getting, they account for a miniscule fraction of all violent crime (0.02%) and in recent years only about 6% of firearms offenses. But with crime so serious, Labor needs to be seen as doing something. The government recently reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the four years from 199899 to 200203.

    Crime was not supposed to rise after handguns were banned in 1997. Yet, since 1996 the serious violent crime rate has soared by 69%: robbery is up by 45% and murders up by 54%. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50% from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.

    The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the last survey done, shows the violent-crime rate in England and Wales was twice the rate in the U.S. When the new survey for 2004 comes out, that gap will undoubtedly have widened even further as crimes reported to British police have since soared by 35%, while declining 6% in the U.S.

    The high crime rates have so strained resources that 29% of the time in London it takes police longer than 12 minutes to arrive at the scene. No wonder police nearly always arrive on the crime scene after the crime has been committed.

    As understandable as the desire to "do something" is, Britain seems to have already banned most weapons that can help commit a crime. Yet, it is hard to see how the latest proposals will accomplish anything.

    Banning guns that fire blanks and some imitation guns. Even if guns that fire blanks are converted to fire bullets, they would be lucky to fire one or two bullets and most likely pose more danger to the shooter than the victim. Rather than replace the barrel and the breach, it probably makes more sense to simply build a new gun.

    Making it very difficult to get a license for a shotgun and banning those under 18 from using shotguns also adds little. Ignoring the fact that shotguns make excellent self-defense weapons, they are so rarely used in crime, that the Home Office's report doesn't even provide a breakdown of crimes committed with shotguns.

    Britain is not alone in its experience with banning guns. Australia has also seen its violent crime rates soar to rates similar to Britain's after its 1996 Port Arthur gun control measures. Violent crime rates averaged 32% higher in the six years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did the year before the law in 1995. The same comparisons for armed robbery rates showed increases of 74%.

    During the 1990s, just as Britain and Australia were more severely regulating guns, the U.S. was greatly liberalizing individuals' abilities to carry guns. Thirty-seven of the 50 states now have so-called right-to-carry laws that let law-abiding adults carry concealed handguns once they pass a criminal background check and pay a fee. Only half the states require some training, usually around three to five hours' worth. Yet crime has fallen even faster in these states than the national average. Overall, the states in the U.S. that have experienced the fastest growth rates in gun ownership during the 1990s have experienced the biggest drops in murder rates and other violent crimes.

    Many things affect crime; the rise of drug-gang violence in Britain is an important part of the story, just as it has long been important in explaining the U.S.'s rates. Drug gangs also help explain one of the many reasons it is so difficult to stop the flow of guns into a country. Drug gangs can't simply call up the police when another gang encroaches on their turf, so they end up essentially setting up their own armies. And just as they can smuggle drugs into the country, they can smuggle in weapons to defend their turf.

    Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that if the law-abiding citizens obey the law and the criminals don't, the rules create sitting ducks who cannot defend themselves. This is especially true for those who are physically weaker, women and the elderly.

    September 6, 2004

    John Lott [send him mail], a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of The Bias Against Guns(Regnery 2003).

  • DudeMan
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    well you are talking about senator kerry... like he gives a crap about arming troops... it seems he did all he could to get out of the fighting in nam..... invenmting purple hearts and such...

    Leave a comment:


  • CingularDuality
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by DudeMan
    well i am sure if those companies are going bust because of improper practise or some such charge to which they are answerable then another company will very quickly assume its place, this time with the addiquate rules and regulations to reduce gun crime.

    just because one company falls does not mean all companies wont bother... its a market, at the moment saturated, but if they are acting improper deserve to pay.
    No, these lawsuits are attacking the entire US firearms industry, not just a company here and there... They allege that because a criminal uses a gun that the manufacturer, despite following the law, is somehow responsible. This is akin to saying that Ford or Chevrolet is responsible for a fatal automobile accident when there was no product malfunction.

    Leave a comment:


  • DudeMan
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    well i am sure if those companies are going bust because of improper practise or some such charge to which they are answerable then another company will very quickly assume its place, this time with the addiquate rules and regulations to reduce gun crime.

    just because one company falls does not mean all companies wont bother... its a market, at the moment saturated, but if they are acting improper deserve to pay.

    Leave a comment:


  • CingularDuality
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Leave a comment:


  • DudeMan
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    he he he ... still against guns but funny

    Leave a comment:


  • CingularDuality
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    One of the biggest gun banners goes hunting:



    Leave a comment:


  • Wolfie
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by CingularDuality
    This is kinda off topic, but I didn't want to dredge up another old gun thread.

    This site explains the differences between a currently banned "assault weapon" and a currently legal "sporting rifle". There's only a page or two of reading and then a photo quiz to see if you can tell the difference between the two: http://www.onlinetoday.com/users/kolya/
    It is interesting that the law was passed "to protect American lives" yet the last 2 big acts of violence against American lives were carried out with box cutters/airplanes and fertilizer (OKC)

    Leave a comment:


  • Wolfie
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by DudeMan
    accept as i have shown you the stats do not accurately guage the problem.

    ok

    violent crime lots of things

    gun crime only one of those things

    no gun culture in england

    therefore still very limited amounts of gun crimes comitted.


    got it in lamens now
    Isn't the basis of violent crime when criminals think they can use force in some matter to committ an act of aggression against another person with the chance of the victim fighting back slim? If someone believes that they can use a weapon to threaten/hurt/kill a victim and not worry about the victim protecting themselves with a weapon, they are more likely to commit the crime than not.

    Leave a comment:


  • DudeMan
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by CingularDuality
    Hmmm, the stats seem to indicate otherwise, however... But let's just ignore them and concentrate on feeling good because there are no evil guns around.

    accept as i have shown you the stats do not accurately guage the problem.

    ok

    violent crime lots of things

    gun crime only one of those things

    no gun culture in england

    therefore still very limited amounts of gun crimes comitted.


    got it in lamens now

    Leave a comment:


  • phyllis
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by CingularDuality
    concentrate on feeling good because there are no evil guns around.
    OoOOOO...Look...Loookkkkkk...Cing found the Key !! :icon14:

    Leave a comment:


  • CingularDuality
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by DudeMan
    and we are not worse off because of it.
    Hmmm, the stats seem to indicate otherwise, however... But let's just ignore them and concentrate on feeling good because there are no evil guns around.

    Leave a comment:


  • DudeMan
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by phyllis
    My point exactly Mr.footinyerbackside......You DO have a ban on blades over a measly 2 inches, and yet a knife is STILL the weapon of choice for violent crimes ! So how do you expect that a ban on weapons here will make anything other than a gun the weapon of choice ?




    makes a lot more sense than the fact that we don't have a gun ban :icon_roll

    no not at all, we have the legeslature and it works, violent crimes in the united kingdom as i have already said involvs alot more than just knife and gun attacks,

    assault glassing and other areas of non fatal attacks are considered violent. the amount of crime as a whole in my contry since 1997 is down,

    the stats dont lie, and if all you lot can come up with is its my right well no infact in this country it isnt a right.

    and we are not worse off because of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • DudeMan
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by CingularDuality

    actually no it isnt.

    Leave a comment:


  • phyllis
    replied
    Re: Banning guns has backfired

    Originally posted by DudeMan
    yeah well see your foot remove it from your mouth please, in the unkited kingdom in places of public it is illigle to posses a knife with a blade size of more than 2 inches in length.
    My point exactly Mr.footinyerbackside......You DO have a ban on blades over a measly 2 inches, and yet a knife is STILL the weapon of choice for violent crimes ! So how do you expect that a ban on weapons here will make anything other than a gun the weapon of choice ?


    Originally posted by leejo
    I also suggest that one reason why 75% of the world's serial killers are in the US may be because our law enforcement infrastructure is among the best in the world. Many 3rd world serial killers may not be identified as such because local police departments aren't able to communicate relevant data to each other, so these 3rd-world killers' crimes seem unrelated.
    09-11-2004 03:49 PM
    makes a lot more sense than the fact that we don't have a gun ban :icon_roll

    Leave a comment:

Connect

Collapse

TeamSpeak 3 Server

Collapse

Twitter Feed

Collapse

Working...
X