Page 11 of 14 « First<910111213>Last »
Topic Options
#57638 - 07/27/11 12:49 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Autodidact]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Autodidact

D pointed out nobody is trying to control pools. Diabetes has tracked up in step with sugar consumption over the last century, yet nobody is proposing national diet mandates. As long as you're doing it to yourself, it's all good. That's the reason the illegality of marijuana seems so hypocritical, and the reason that suicides (which is three times higher than gun homicides) don't make the news.


The difference is probably that guns are made to cause harm - pools are not. Just a thought...


 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Sweden as an example, is indeed lower on gun-related crime, but one can hardly consider it on the right track when, at the same time, it is rape country number one in the Euro charts. You wonder why those Swedes like to rape so much. Then you look at the figures and you realize it is not really them.


There are a few different reasons for this:

(1) What is considered as rape, according to Swedish law compared to that of other countries, is alot more unforgiving. Basically what may be regarded as something less than rape in another country would be classified, in a swedish court, as rape.

(2) Sweden has a very high police report rate when it comes to rape and sexually related crimes. Alot higher than in most other parts of the world. So while Sweden has more reports on rape than Congo for examle it doesnt mean that we have more rapes than said country.

(3) The amnount of rapes has been increasing. Studies havent been made in Sweden regarding this particular subject (on purpose nonetheless because people in power are afraid that it will result in xenophobia). Norway however has studied this and the results are that immigrants are highly overrepresented in these cases. And it usually isnt about European or Asian immigrants but mostly those of African descent, more particular people from Somalia.


Edit: I actually found that studies has been made regarding this. According to BRÅ its 5 times more common, in relation to native Swedish men, that immigrants are reported for rape. 50% of those sentenced for rape were immigrants (1996-2007) first and second generation.

There is also an overrepresentation of certain nationalities which leads to the conclusions that there are no socioeconomic, sex,living condition or wage variables that alone can explain the overrepresentation.

People from Irak represents 1.26% of the Swedish population but 10.53% of the sentenced rapists. Thats an overrepresentation of 8.36!


Edited by TheInsane (07/27/11 01:03 PM)

Top
#57639 - 07/27/11 01:03 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I didn't say you had more rape then Congo. If, I'd surely would not have entered Sweden without steel pants.

But the problem is an increase of certain crimes related to an increase in immigration. It's happening everywhere in Europe and by blurring the facts, government isn't changing them from happening.

Down here, some newspapers have a policy of not including names when reporting crime. If they didn't people would notice that the majority has funny names.

The problem is that we're being fed the illusion it's all going well. An illusion being upheld by the Left which inevitably lead to a decline during the last years. And still, they keep marginalizing everyone that has a different opinion.

Take Geert Wilders as an example. Even when being the most important player in Dutch politics right now, and having a firm and large voter base, he is continuously demonized and marginalized and through that, everyone that voted for him.

Is it really a surprise some become very very pissed?

D.

Top
#57640 - 07/27/11 01:12 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

Down here, some newspapers have a policy of not including names when reporting crime. If they didn't people would notice that the majority has funny names.


Where is "down here" if I may ask?

In Sweden newspapers usually dont publish names (even though it happens). They used to write out desciptions of the suspects but some stopped because they feared xenophobia since most descriptions seems to decribe non-european immigrants.

 Quote:
Is it really a surprise some become very very pissed?


Nope

What really gets to me is the marginalization and demonization of people who critiques the current system and also can present numbers and facts that they indeed have a point. Sweden has come along a little bit with the entry of a nationalist party in the government. The others do not agree with what the nationalists see as the cure but at least they start to admit that there is a problem rather than ignoring it. Thats always something.

Top
#57641 - 07/27/11 01:19 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
Where is "down here" if I may ask?


Here is Belgium, a small, unimportant and currently unstable country in the midst of Europe. And hopefully its first modern linguistic warzone. A man can dream not? ;\)

D.

Top
#57648 - 07/27/11 03:24 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 860
Loc: Nashville
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
All (the state does) is provide an illusion of safety. You can not stop anyone who has the will and takes the initiative.

Sure they keep people under control through fear of punishment but those are not the ones anyone needs to worry about. Those will not act either if their victims carry guns.

It is true that ultimately no one is safe, that each of us is vulnerable to criminal attacks regardless of what regulations are put in place. However, the anti-regulation argument that criminals will break the law anyway is, in and of itself, weak. Why have laws at all if the bad guys are just going to break them? We have laws and regulations so societies will know what’s expected of them and so legal action can be taken against those who do not comply.

Licensing gun owners makes sense to me because it gives law enforcement another tool in their arsenal to use against those suspected of engaging in criminal activity. Those possessing a firearm but no license could have their gun confiscated, be fined and, if necessary, detained. Licensed gun owners who don’t use their guns responsibly could, among other things, have their license revoked. I don’t understand why prospective gun owners having to demonstrate to the state that they’re law-abiding citizens who are considered competent to own and operate a gun wouldn’t be a good idea.
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#57649 - 07/27/11 03:35 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: William Wright]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I have no problem with licensing gun owners but it simply does not solve any problem. The majority of homicides are commit “on the moment”. Which means they are not calculated nor planned. Doped, drugged, enraged; these kinds of situations trigger most of them. Laws, consequences and gun control matter little at that moment. Of course it can be argued that less firearms will result in less use during these situations. Yes, that's indeed true but then you'll just see more homicides commit with knives, blunt objects or whatever available at those moments.

Regulation also does not have an effect on the possibility to obtain unregistered weapons, and these are often used in calculated crime. They do not want registered weapons for obvious reasons.

Gun control is always argued as a solution while it close to never is.

D.

Top
#57650 - 07/27/11 04:23 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Of course most people arent psychotic killers but you dont have to be to be able to murder another person or accidently cause death by the hand of a gun.


I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Are you saying that I don't have to own a gun? I know that I don't have to but I prefer to have them. And in all my years of gun ownership I have never shot anyone or even had to point it at someone.

 Quote:
You write that "Gun control doesn't work. Period" without any explanation. I live in a society where it does work fine and most countries surrounding mine has the same experiences. So in what way does it not work in our northern european countries according to you?


Gun control doesn't work in that it does nothing to guns out of the hands of people who intend to use them for nefarious purposes. Sure, gun stores have to run a background check on any prospective buyer but in private sales (citizen to citizen) there are no such laws.

Guns are not the issue, people are the issue.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#57651 - 07/27/11 04:38 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
 Quote:
Of course most people arent psychotic killers but you dont have to be to be able to murder another person or accidently cause death by the hand of a gun.


I'm not sure what you are getting at here. Are you saying that I don't have to own a gun? I know that I don't have to but I prefer to have them. And in all my years of gun ownership I have never shot anyone or even had to point it at someone.


Your argument was that most people are "good" and that means more guns in the hands of "good people" - the opposite of what you call "psychotic assholes who wants to murder people".

My answer was that I dont consider men in general to be psychotic assholes but that that isnt a requirement for being responsible for death by gunfire (one way or another). More guns = more gun related deaths and injuries. Its quite simple really.

 Quote:
Gun control doesn't work in that it does nothing to guns out of the hands of people who intend to use them for nefarious purposes. Sure, gun stores have to run a background check on any prospective buyer but in private sales (citizen to citizen) there are no such laws.


True, those who want a gun for criminal activity will get them anyway. However the amount of unplanned and accidental deaths (or injuries) caused by gunfire will be heavily reduced. Less guns on the marked will also lead to them being less accessible for the people who might not be heavily criminal but only bordeline so. That to will stop some of the gun related violence some countries experience.

 Quote:
Guns are not the issue, people are the issue.


True, which is why less guns in the hands of people also lead to less deaths and injuries caused by gunfire. Guns without people around them would cause little harm you see ;\)


Edited by TheInsane (07/27/11 04:40 PM)

Top
#57652 - 07/27/11 04:44 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
Less guns on the marked will also lead to them being less accessible for the people who might not be heavily criminal but only bordeline so. That to will stop some of the gun related violence some countries experience.


This is a flawed argument since you'd have to provide evidence that less guns directly imply less violence in general. Else we're just arguing which is most civilized; killing with a gun or killing with a knife.

D.

Top
#57653 - 07/27/11 04:57 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
More guns = more gun related deaths and injuries


But not all of those killed are innocents. A good portion of them will be people who were killed in self-defense and basically had it coming.

 Quote:
However the amount of unplanned and accidental deaths (or injuries) caused by gunfire will be heavily reduced.


How do you figure? I'm pretty sure most accidental deaths and injuries involving firearms are tied in with guns that were legally purchased.

 Quote:
Less guns on the marked will also lead to them being less accessible for the people who might not be heavily criminal but only bordeline so.


And how do you plan to make it so there as less guns? Currently there are more guns than people in the world and I don't see that number decreasing. It is not as if a large number of people would be willing to give their guns up. Especially not if the government was demanding that people do it. That would just open a whole new can of worms.

 Quote:
True, which is why less guns in the hands of people also lead to less deaths and injuries caused by gunfire.


But that will not stop people from using other means to kill or maim. Or is violence only bad when it is gun violence?
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#57654 - 07/27/11 05:17 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
Less guns on the marked will also lead to them being less accessible for the people who might not be heavily criminal but only bordeline so. That to will stop some of the gun related violence some countries experience.


This is a flawed argument since you'd have to provide evidence that less guns directly imply less violence in general. Else we're just arguing which is most civilized; killing with a gun or killing with a knife.

D.


You're right, we can only say that it least to less "gun influenced" deaths/injuries. But I'd rather have people walk around with knifes than with guns if I had to choose even though neither is good of course.

Basically I choose a line where I'd rather have people have easy access to one weapon instead of two weapon (where the second is one that is also more dangerous in many ways not least because of the distance it creates between the shooter and the victim).

 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
But not all of those killed are innocents. A good portion of them will be people who were killed in self-defense and basically had it coming.


Who is then to judge who is worthy and not? Of course it will be an increased number of people dead that deserved it. There will also be an increased number of people dead that didnt in the slightest deserve it.

 Quote:
How do you figure? I'm pretty sure most accidental deaths and injuries involving firearms are tied in with guns that were legally purchased. . .

. . .And how do you plan to make it so there as less guns? Currently there are more guns than people in the world and I don't see that number decreasing.


If a country bans guns except for people who have a sepcific use for them (like hunters) they will become less avaliable to the vast majority of the countrys inhabitants. Its not rocket science. The number of guns might not decrease but the avaliability will and there will perhaps be fewer new industries started to produce hand guns in said country.

And again, my argument is that less guns, legal or illegal = less deaths of all kinds related to gun violence. In a country with strict gun control there will be less guns and therefore the access to them wont be as high and therefore deaths and violence by gunfire will be reduced.

I dont have numbers but I doubt that a ban on guns will create more deadly violence. Either it stays at the same rate or, more likely, it will be reduced.

 Quote:
But that will not stop people from using other means to kill or maim. Or is violence only bad when it is gun violence?


No its not. But look at what I wrote above. What do you think would be the difference between two identical countries, with the same laws, only that one of them had strict gun control and the other not?

Top
#57655 - 07/27/11 05:30 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Look at the other side of the issue.

What do you think would happen if everyone was allowed to carry a concealed firearm? Do you think rapist would that easily jump a woman? Do you think mugging that stranger would be as tempting as it is now? By psychology alone, it would have an effect upon other crimes.

D.

Top
#57656 - 07/27/11 05:39 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Look at the other side of the issue.

What do you think would happen if everyone was allowed to carry a concealed firearm? Do you think rapist would that easily jump a woman? Do you think mugging that stranger would be as tempting as it is now? By psychology alone, it would have an effect upon other crimes.

D.


It probably would make a difference. However what is needed is really more civil courage which is frightfully lacking. Even though an assault is happening in a big crowd, more often than not no one dares to interfere. If people just did, especially with the numbers gain that would be the most important key in all of this.

But yeah in hypothetical cases like this you would have to weeigh the pros and cons of both sides. In cases of rape pepperspray is actually very underrated - it works great. However many countries have laws against carrying it with you. I would definately allow pepper spray before firearms.

Top
#57661 - 07/27/11 07:59 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: TheInsane]
Meph9 Offline
member


Registered: 04/02/11
Posts: 161
Well you outside of all the dueling over semantics it's quite simple:

Gun laws do not stop murders but they can decrease crimes involving guns to some extent

Most people don't want to commit

The people who do wouldn't really be stopped by anything in terms of law and regulation

I think there's a bit of dancing around the same points here. Really I'm not sure what the huge disagreement is here.

Top
#57662 - 07/27/11 08:39 PM Re: Oslo 22/7-2011. Never forgive. Never forget. [Re: Meph9]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Some additional information on the Australian gun control experience.

The below links lead to the Australian government’s Australian Institute of Criminology.

The first link provides information on Australian homicide’s.

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.aspx

The second link provides information on Australian violent crime more generally.

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent%20crime.aspx

Other violent crime, such as knife crime may have increased and we do still have some gun crime.

But, we can limit the rampages, such as Port Arthur etc. by making it much harder for nutcases to get their hands on guns.

It is harder to have a tragedy/massacre if you have a knife wielding maniac, rather than a gun wielding maniac.

I think this applies, even if, there is a black market for guns in this country.

We don’t have a perfect country by any means, we still have bad neighbourhoods and violent individuals, but still, if we can limit a criminal/nutcase’s options by getting rid of guns than that is the better way to go.

Top
Page 11 of 14 « First<910111213>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.03 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.