OT - if any of you guys ever decide...

[Doc]

that your life is worthless and you want to go out in a blaze of glory and thinking about grabbing your gun(s) and head down to the mall or local school or university and start shooting at people, do everyone a favor and just blow your brains out first. If you're going to destroy your life, there is no need to destroy hundreds of other lives in the process. Just do everyone a favor and take yourself out.

[Blue Hen]

We could prevent all this stupid random shooting/killing if everybody was issued guns.....like all the kids that hang around the mall, all the store clerks and stock boys, the janitors, everybody out in the parking lot, all the residents around the mall...everybody !

...at least that's what B90 has been telling me . If evertybody packed guns there would be very little gun violence. Makes sense, doesn't it ?

[Bucs90]

Wow, cheap shot there Hen. EVERY study on statistics done by law enforcement shows gun control laws do not prevent violent crime, but rather a spike is seen. Myself and the NRA, which I'm a proud member of, only support legal rights to privately owned weapons. This was a 20 year old. By law, being under 21, he was not in legal possession of that weapon, and by being in a shopping mall, he was in possession of a firearm in a banned area. So, those two gun control laws did not prevent this tragedy, obviously. The police response was 6 minutes- by then the event was long from over. The ONLY way this person could've been stopped was if mall security had guns, which by law they cannot, or if a private citizen carried a legal concealed weapon. Incidents with private citizens who are armed that stop crimes in progress are in the tens of thousands- however, the anti-gun media will NOT show these as they don't fit their agenda. I can assure you that the number of would be violent or in progress violent crimes that are stopped by private citizens outnumbers those that are stopped by police- I see the reports and law enforcement data daily. You won't hear it, however, as most liberal media outlets support anti-gun legislation.

The mall incident was a tragedy that almost no law or lack thereof would have prevented. This kid wouldn't have cared if mall security or private citizens had weapons. He would probably have preferred it. These are not the crimes that are deterred by private ownership of guns.

The crimes that are prevented are the ones that are premeditated and involve criminals who want to LIVE and escape. The chance of encountering an armed victim is a huge deterrent. Sociological studies have been done with prisoners who confirmed that they would be hesitant to attempt crime in an area where citizens can and often carry concealed weapons. As a matter of fact, in Charleston, SC, there is an area known as the "neck" of the peninsula where carjackings are a regualr occurence. Usually 1-2 a week. 6 months ago a Columbia man on vacation drives through the "neck" after a night out to dinner, a thug peice of trash tries to carjack him, and the private citizen shoots the thug. Killed him. There has been 1 carjacking in the 6 months since. The thugs don't forget stuff like that.

Hen, the reality is guns in America are like illegal immigrants in America. No law is going to get rid of them. There are too many, they are too hard to find, and no politician has the guts or political death wish to attempt to get rid of them. So- the question is not how to get rid of them, but rather, what is the best way to deal with them? And, with the presence of guns in our society a concrete fact, it is also a fact that allowing private citizens to legally own a firearm deters crime. Banning that right allows crime to spike as the criminal element views this as a weaker pool of victims.

Keep in mind myself and the NRA only condone legally owned firearms. Under 21 is not legal. Convicted felons cannot owned a firearm. In South Carolina that included any person convicted of domestic violence (wife beater law), anyone dishonorably discharged from the military, anyone who has been legally deemed to be mentally ill, anyone who is subject to a restraining order, among other things.

Gun ownership deters crime and a good joke to use as an analogy to lighten this topic is this: A delivery man pulls into a house. He sees "Beware of Dog" signs posted 10 times all the way up to the yard. The owner comes out, wearing a "Beware of Dog" shirt. The delivery man gets out, and a tiny teacup poodle runs up to him. He says to the homeowner, "This dog can't hurt anyone, why the signs?" The homeowner says, "Yeah, I know, but at night, the damn crooks don't know that."

It is basically the type of victims we want crooks to think they are approaching- do you want your local thugs to think they are approaching a weak, unarmed victim, or a potentially legally armed victim- preferrably with a "castle" law such as Texas?

[Blue Hen]

You tend to micro view all these things we debate, offering individual examples. I prefer to macro view these issues offering the overall trends/patterns...just our styles, B90. And regarding the guns issue, in the overall scheme of reality, countries with tough gun laws have only a fraction of violent gun crimes compared with the gun obsessed United States...no way around it B90. Also, I have seen data indicating that households with guns have a decidedly greater rate of murders and suicides than those without. Your Puppy Dog poodle story doesn't change these facts.

This society is chock full of very fragile minds and flooding this society with guns is a very bad combination ...a disaster. How to get rid of them is another issue that our politicians won't explore , simply because of too many 'gun' votes to be lost.
I guess we're just stuck with this dumb 'Gun Culture'. Btw, B90, I want you to know that I own several guns and gunshot wounds, so I'm not a complete gun outsider.

[Coach 3]

200,000,000 ILLEGAL GUNS ON THE STREET IN AMERICA..the lethal genie is out of the bottle gentleman...gun control is a moot argument at this point...i dotn own a gun currently, but will when i retire to the mountains a decade from now...... ther real question here is what kind of parents raise a suburban kid- who is not severely mentally ill ( e.g. schizophrenic)- to hate life and the living so much to do this?...its like jeffrey's dahmers parents...selfish, negligent, disengaged...dahmers father has a phd in chemsitry... very ointlleigent man but cared not at all about "parenting 101" obviously...dahmer kllign animals and placing them all over the house on spikes...etc...no intervention...look at the Columbine situation...upper middle class families...one of the two kids had a full arsenal of guns and explosives in plain view in his bedroom..parents didnt know--or care??????....two days after columbine massacre, dylan klebolds mother shows up at the beauty parlor in town for her manicure as if nothing happened...says to the stunned shop owner, 'why is everyoen so surprised that i am here today???', as if her son got arrested for petty theft or shoplifting from the 7-11....parenting- or lack thereof... obviously, same story in the ghettos ... FAILED PARENTING...period...

[Blue Hen]

That's surely a good part of the root problem.

Failed parenting + mental instability + glorigied gun violence in 'pop' media + a gazillioin tons of readily obtainable guns = a very , very bad formula for this nation.

[ZOOMBAG]

Well if someone had been armed and right there they could have taken the guy out before he took out some of those people....

And he had obtained his gun ILLEGALLY, so no gun control laws would have prevented this kid from obtaining his weapon.

[Hubbs]

If you let the govt get our guns then we will be living under Marshall Law the next time a Terrorist attack happens.

[Blue Hen]

..and at the same time you might have 45 unstable, armed, wacked out teenager street punks that just had a fight with their girlfriends or drug buddies down at the other end of the mall and decided to impulsively start shooting. Arming everybody is a very very bad tradeoff there, Zoom. at least imo.

[Doc]

hand all the passengers a gun when they board the plane and collect them when they're deboarding.

The problem is, when someone decides they're going to go on one of these rampages, its difficult to stop it. I'm sure there are always signs but as someone pointed out above, people tend to ignore them until it's too late. But I don't think arming everyone is the answer.

[Bucs90]

This is a great discussion. I'm glad we are having it without name calling and absurd statements from either side. Let me respond....

Zoom, you are right 100%. He was in possession of that gun ILLEGALLY and was in possession of it in a mall where it is ILLEGAL to have a gun. So, the gun control laws in place did not prevent it. Good point.

Hen, I never suggest arming everyone. The NRA has never suggested this. I'm in favor of the gun laws we have now- In S.C., you must be 21, cannot be a convicted felon, cannot have a dishonrable discharge military, cannot be deemed mentally ill, cannot be subject of a restraining order, cannot be convicted of domestic violence, and many other guidelines. However, there is no problem allowing private citizens who legally can own a firearm to own one. My argument was never about the total sum number of guns. It was about gun control laws. Now, there are hundreds of studies, some legit, some not, regarding this. Canada, for example, has the same amount of guns per capita as America privately owned by it's citizens. Yet, crime is a fraction. Even Micheal Moore showed us this in Bowling for Columbine- propoganda film full of lies, but he said it.

The Center for Disease Control did a massive study on the effectiveness of gun control laws in reducing violent crime. Here is a link:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

Their findings were "inconclusive" and used phrases such as "yet to be determined" when referencing effectiveness. The CDC being a fairly left establishment, it is easy to see they were disappointed and didn't want to say the fact that gun control laws do nothing but provide more favorable targets to would be criminals.

Hen, I agree that teenage punks shouldn't be armed. Which is why the 21 year old law ALREADY EXISTS. I'm all for raising drastically the penalties for gun crimes. The gun isn't the problem. It is the court system that keeps spitting out these thugs back onto the street and liberal judges being soft on criminals producing repeat offenders. So, should we take away guns, letting these repeat offenders know that not only is the court system soft, but now the victim is less armed or not at all? Am I the only one who thinks this is a bad idea?

I understand we view things different on this. You view the macro version, I view the micro version. Maybe because I deal with the micro every day at work. The private citizen living out in a suburb who legally owns an AR-15 ($1,500) a Benelli Shotgun ($1,000) and a 1911 ($1,000) aren't as much a problem. The problem is the 19 year old inner city repeat offender drug dealer, who is a convicted felon who was released due to overcrowded jails, who bought a High Point 9mm ($150) from a person who probably stole it or brought it in over the Southern border (making the weapon illegally possessed by the drug dealer and the provider) who uses it for a revenge shooting and drops it into the river. Yet, when an unpreventable tragedy such as the mall incident occurs, gun control advocates jump on it- when in fact, no gun control law could have prevented it, as 2 were already in place and failed.

Gun control laws sound good in theory, but just don't work. It is exactly like those who say if we help Mexico with aid, their economy will grow and prevent illegal immigrants from wanting to come here. In theory, sounds great. But would never work.

[Bucs90]

You know, this would've been one helluva offseason thread!

BTW, here is one more link providing data and sources to dispell the myth that gun control laws reduce violent crime:

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st176/s176c.html

Conveniently, the liberal media ignores these studies.

[Blue Hen]

I suspect that the NCPA lobbies for the gun industry as it does for all of the private sector. I might be a UD grad but I'm not that dumb to 'buy' that, B90.

Give us some violent gun crime rates internationally comparing countries with gun control to the US.

[Don]

Wow, cheap shot there Hen. EVERY study on statistics done by law enforcement shows gun control laws do not prevent violent crime, but rather a spike is seen.....

and every study done by the tobacco industry says tobacco doesn't cause cancer. Could you prove some data from an "independent" source (if there is such a thing)? The problem is these studies cost a lot of money and "someone" has to foot the bill. The data on either side is always suspect.

[Coach 3]

...a large, very metroplitan city with tremendous alcoholism ( i,e, read: disinihibiton) rates, there were less than 10 gun homicides in the entire city...a few dozen stabbing homicides.. cANADA IS A modern western society... BUT DIFFERENT AND OBVIOUSLY MORE MATURE CULTURE......thats one every year more or less with a gun., IN A CITY OF 1.5 MILLION PEOPLE...in america, many adore and glorify violent, carnage-ridden tv/movies ( willis, scHwarzennazi, mindless explosion/killing fantasias as primtime must-see entertainment. )..... but thats the least of it... my overridiing point is that we have so many paranoiacs, alienated and damaged people running around, these outbursts are and HAVE BEEN INEVITABLE as part of the modern american experience..AND WILL REMAIN INEVITABLE.......charles whitman, at the UTexas tower, sirhan sirhan in a rage , kip kinkle in oregon, the jonesboro arkansas boys, malvo and muhammad...on and on it will go....

[Bucs90]

Hen, I did provide the link to the CDC study of the effectiveness of gun control laws. The CDC is "neutral" or slightly left. Scroll to the bottom. They found ever single study to be inconclusive, or insufficient data, or whatever term they used. Basically, they attempted to use every phrase except "gun control didn't work". Also, the other link I provided itself provides within it numerous links to data showing results of studies on gun control.

Coach 3, Micheal Moore himself proved that Canada has and enjoys it's guns just as much as America in the same amount of numbers. Gun control in D.C. has been a collosal failure. And, in England, the country is being over-run by Muslim extremists and British police are now considering carrying firearms as violence in that country is getting out of hand. England has Muslim clerics promoting violence against British citizens in the middle of the street, and there is no danger of retaliation from citizens. England is a time bomb, terrorist and criminally.

Hen, I can understand your stance. Before going into law enforcement, I didn't own a gun and had mostly the same opinion on guns, as I never had a need for one or was a victim of anything involving one. You and I are sane, rational people (except next year when UD plays FU). We would never use a gun to commit a crime, or view an unarmed citizenry as "targets". But criminals do. And gun bans inspire criminals. They know now that only the police have guns, and if they act quick, their soft target cannot fight back and police won't arrive quick enough.

Also, Hen, before comparing other countries we must look at a few facts: Our culture, our laws, our history. We have a higher % of citizens jailed than any other nation in the world. So, when considering a gun ban, we should consider what type of criminals we have. A gun ban in Canada? Maybe a good idea. Canadian criminals and American criminals are two different animals.

Anyhow, I provide two very good links showing gun bans don't work. I am interested in seeing a link showing they work.

[Bucs90]

Just one bit of international data, backed by sources listed on the bottom of the page of the 2nd link:

Other countries have had similar experiences. After Canada passed a gun control law in 1977, the murder rate failed to decline but armed robbery and burglary, crimes frequently deterred by gun ownership, increased.23 (Canadian homicide rates are slightly lower than those in states along the U.S. border.) Violent crime accelerated in Taiwan and Jamaica after handguns were banned.24

If a person wants to murder someone a gun or absence of one won't stop it. Just look at medieval society, it was much more violent. But as the data in Canada showed, a spike in armed robbery and burglary resulted from the gun ban- two crimes which often result in death or injury. Columbine, VT, and the Omaha Mall would not have been prevented by a gun control law, as there were already laws in place barring those individuals from possessing firearms based on their ages and/or location of use.

Oh, and BTW, here is a link to the result of what happens when a UN like gun ban is adopted, and the citizens resist (as Americans would) and the military or police must force the citizens into surrendering their guns:

http://reason.com/news/show/118708.html

[Bucs90]

Sorry guys, not to beat a dead horse, but someone asked for international data. Here are some quotes from Australian sources after their gun ban went into effect:

"The number of Victorians murdered with firearms has almost tripled since the introduction of tighter gun laws.
--Geelong Advertiser, Victoria, Sept. 11, 1997.

"Gun crime is on the rise despite tougher laws imposed after the Port Arthur massacre, but gun control lobbyists maintain Australia is a safer place. . . . The number of robberies involving guns jumped 39% last year to 2183, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and assaults involving guns rose 28% to 806. The number of gun murders, excluding the Port Arthur massacre, increased by 19% to 75."
--"Gun Crime Rises Despite Controls," Illawarra Mercury Oct. 28, 1998.

"Crime involving guns is on the rise despite tougher laws. The number of robberies with guns jumped 39% in 1997, while assaults involving guns rose 28% and murders by 19%."
--"Gun crime soars," Morning Herald, Sydney, Oct. 28, 1998.

"Murders by firearms have actually increased (in Victoria) since the buyback scheme, which removed 225,000 registered and unregistered firearms from circulation. There were 18 shooting murders in 1996-97, after the buyback scheme had been introduced, compared with only six in 1995-1996 before the scheme started."
--"Killings rise in gun hunt," Herald Sun, Melbourne, Dec. 23, 1998.

"Victoria is facing one of its worst murder tolls in a decade and its lowest arrest rate ever."
--Herald Sun, Melbourne, Dec. 11, 1999.

"The environment is more violent and dangerous than it was some time ago."
--South Australia Police Commissioner Mal Hyde, reported in The Advertiser, Adelaide, Dec. 23, 1999.

Source: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=30&issue=015

I'll leave this topic alone for a while now. I think I provided adequate links and data. I know the idea that gun control actually increases crime SHOULDN'T be true. It almost goes against common sense, but it is true. Just like the greatest sport in the world having it's champion decided in a 2 team playoff SHOULDN'T be true, as it goes against common sense, but it's true.

[ZOOMBAG]

Everyone of those whacked out teenagers with a violent streak is already armed, in case you didn't know. Any violence prone nutball is already armed, or could be anytime they want to be. Fortunately we just passed a concealed weapons law so now I CAN and DO take my FULLY LOADED 44 Magnum with me everywhere I go...

[ZOOMBAG]

One single armed clerk or security guard or shopper could have stopped this guy before he had a chance to do his deed, or at least before he got as many as he did. Same thing at Virginia Tech. Without a weapon I'd be running or hiding like everyone else at that mall, armed, I'd be shooting back....

[Bucs90]

Zoom, we've disagreed on some issues. But you are right on the target on this one. Much of the anti-gun lobby doesn't consider how a criminal thinks. Softer targets = more crime. If I'm not mistaken, you are a military or former military man, correct? I'm a cop, but work with a lot of former military men. Knowing how safe and effective a firearm is in the right hands goes a long way in supporting gun rights. I agree with you- in a mall or school, if I or any other off-duty cop were present with a firearm, the result may or may not have changed, but the only thing for sure is the a**hole would've had lead coming back at him. In our active shooter training, we train a lot in dealing with the predatory shooter, and how different he is from a hostage shooter in that he wants only to kill, not to get demands met. The quicker a counter weapon can arrive, the more likely lives are to be saved. The idea is to draw the shooter's fire to you, and away from the innocents. Anyhow, those killing sprees can't be prevented with our without laws. But crime deterrent through privately owned weapons is a fact.

[Bucs90]

Zoom didn't see your first post before I responded. Good for you. Guys like you are NOT a threat to peace when carrying a concealed weapon. Thugs and loser punks like the mall kid and the Sean Taylor killers are.

I'm glad to know responsible, and hopefully accurate, people like you are willing to take the steps to protect yourself and are willing to act to protect others if ever needed. (BTW, 44 Magnum is nice, but go for a Glock man!!!)

[ZOOMBAG]

I support gun "control" laws very much. We really need to continue to ensure only legal citizens can get guns legally, better background checks, and mandate a LOT better training. I've never had any kind of issue with my weapons as far as not having them stolen or misused. I know how to use one, have the training, have the required permits.

It is simple and plain logic that a trained, armed person in any of these incidents would have saved lives. Not sure if the perpetrator had known people were armed would have made a difference in him choosing to do what he did (he was insane, afterall) but if someone had been there capable of shooting back, we wouldn't have 8 dead people now.

And armed society is a polite society.

[Blue Hen]

Well, you sure have been working hard to support your pro-gun position. I'm not willing to do that, although I have, indeed, seen statistics indicating that gun control countries have fractional violent gun crime rates of the US. You make good points, B90, and I appreciate them but I think I'll always feel that the glutony of these things is very bad. Responsible gun owners can become irresponsible in a moment of stress and with a hand gun so handy....well bad stuff happens. With no guns readily handy, these fragile minds have an opportunity to cool down . Anyway, that's my micro hypothetical example. Guns make it too easy. I guess I'm with Biffy on this....pro abolition.

[Bucs90]

Hen, I'd be interested in seeing those statistics, as every one I've seen shows the opposite, or as the leftist CDC study showed "inconclusive".

I can understand your logic. In a utopian society where there are no guns, the logic is simple- no gun crimes. The reality is that society exists no where on this planet, and never will exist again.

And, in final thoughts, I bring up medeival times, Roman times, etc. Among the most violent periods in world history- no guns present. I agree with you that fragile minds exist. A gun only makes the kill easier. If we outlawed V8 and above engines, would we stop speeding on our highways? Of course not, we'd just make it harder.

Odd coalition there Hen, with Biffy. But, I can say I respect your opinion and desire to lower violent crime in our society- we both have the same wish, just have different opinions on how best to achieve it. But, sometime between now and next season, your Delaware Hens may want to find a way to prevent violence on chickens, as my Paladins will not be so kind!!!!

[Coach 3]

....i'll submit i have lived in some very nasty places, including the real world Sopranos country and the inner city of detroit...seen some brual physical violence, was assaulted with a brick once by a gang while jogging in detroit....had soem psycho woman in a car shoot towards my friends and i during a run once in ann arbor cuase my buddy gave her the finger at an intersection...but walking around armed with a gun in a statistically safe area poised to react to crime at any second is kind of paranoid...having the notion at the forefront of your thinking when you are in public that hypervigilance is imperative-- "you could be the victim of crime at any and every given moment" is no way to live your life.....studies in fact show that through our fearmongering corporate media and the shameless fearmongering of bushco. post9-11, people in suburban american now think there is 6 times as much crime going on as there really... personally, i dont care if sane people own guns...even the fetishists who collect weaponery to compensate for their inadequacy in life....or more rational people have concealed permits to carry them...but geez...its a damn unnecessarily fearful way to live....

[Bucs90]

Coach 3, you make a really great point. Unlike some may say, and maybe I didn't clarify, I don't and never will condone "arming everyone". Most people should be able to live a happy, unparanoid life. And for the most part, Americans do. Most Americans think abolishing guns would be a good thing, because they do live a happy life, unparanoid from crime.

And the reason for this is we have outstanding police, a great military and fairly good citizens for the most part. But, there aren't enough police. And having a small % of the private citizenry armed is a great deterrent, and statistics show it.

I compare this to traffic enforcement. There isn't a cop on every single road and highway. There shouldn't be. But, 99% of drivers assume there could be one on any given road, so for the most part speeding and reckless driving is deterred and controlled. But, what if police were banned from writing speeding tickets. The roadways would become chaos. Same thing with private gun ownership. Most homeowners don't have one, or wouldn't use one. But, in areas they are allowed, criminals know they COULD have one, and are deterred.

But, I'd also say while I wouldn't recommend being paranoid, at least be prepared. Everyone I know has a smoke alarm in their home. But I don't know one person whose house has burned down. Hopefully, the great police and private citizens who do carry are enough to allow the majority of people to live a happy life without being paranoid.

[Blue Hen]

Comparative annual GUN homicide rates per 100,000 population
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

USA - 3.98
Italy- 0.81
Switz-0.50
Can - 0.40
Fin - 0.35
Austr- 0.24
Fran - 0.21
Eng - 0.15
Scot- 0.06
Jap - 0.02

Source : www.gun-control-network.org/Gf01.htm . Also check out the suicide rates.....about the same thing.

Anyway, in countries where the govt and politicians have the fortitude to be intelligent about gun control, you have only a fraction of the shootings that we have in gun obsessed, shoot 'em up, USA.

[Bucs90]

Hen, that statistic is misleading, and the website itself I'm sure is a pro-gun control organization, right? The question would be- does the implementation of gun control reduce, raise or have no affect on violent crime? The states in America with the strictest gun laws have the highest rate of violent crime, and the opposite is also true. Australia, for example, attempted gun control and it failed miserably. For example, Canada has as many privately owned guns per capita as America (source the Devil, aka Micheal Moore), yet you show the the obviously lower rate of gun crime.

I don't disagree with have a gun violence problem in America. Yet, all statistics show gun control laws aren't the answer. What is the answer? As the CDC showed, that answer is very complicated. Motive to kill is not created by the presence of a gun. Again, I agree with you that everyone shouldn't be armed. If we gave a gun to every American, it would be a disaster. Yet, the right to allow law abiding ones, and ones allowed to under current laws, is a deterrent to crime. The laws we have now are sufficient. I would 100% be in favor of far stricter penalties on those who commit these crimes. In fact, Hen, I'd say our relatively soft justice system when compared to those nations you listed is the reason for the lower crime, not the gun control law.

[Blue Hen]

Sure it is a pro-gun control site......but are they lying ? I've seen about the same thing , over the years, from multiple sources. Just do a international gun violence comparrison search, see for yourself.

B90, I agree with you - much tougher justice systems are a major part of the lower rates in the intelligent countries. It's a complex issue, and like HFA we're probably never going change our debate positions, but as usual, I have a genuine respect for your opinions....and I worry about your profession with every lunatic out there packing a gun.

[Bucs90]

Luckily, I work in a relatively safe city in Charleston. NYPD, LAPD, Miami-Dade, Detroit, anywhere in Texas, those cops need to be in our prayers.

I respect your opinion, and see the logic in it; I respect more that we can debate this calmly, as many on both sides of this issue cannot.

When I think of this issue, I think of the two extremes- where is there an absolute flood of guns, and where is there no gun at all, and no chance of one getting in or being made. Those two places are gun shops/shows, and prisons.

How many crimes and robberies have we heard of occurring at a gun show/store? None ever for me. And everyone in there is likely armed. Yet, a U.S. prison, with a total absence of guns, is among the most violent places on Earth. Two extremes, but it gets the conversation started in that the reality is we live in a society that is in the middle grey area of those two examples.

But, yes Hen, IMO, a tougher justice system is THE answer to gun crime. The U.S. obviously has the highest rate of gun violence. We have among the softest court systems too. For example, gun crimes in South Carolina often result in a sentence of probation, or worse, PTI (a program where a 6 month once a week class in counseling results in the charge disappearing). This is the case so long as no one dies. It's insane. And 99% of gun crime is committed by those who can't legally own the gun they used anyway. I respect the anti-gun lobbies' goal of lowering violent crime. I just disagree with the best way to do it. IMO, stricter sentences, and in particular sentences that are actually upheld, are the answer. That is one area the foreign nations have right that we don't, hence the far less number of repeat offenders and unstable minds on their streets to commit violent crime.

[Blue Hen]

The perfect wager for us, B90 !
If Delaware beats Furman you must rip up your NRA membership card and drop out.
If Furman beats Delaware I'll go buy a gun.

[Bucs90]

Ha ha ha!!!!!!! Do I have to drop out, I get a police life insurance deal with them that gives my benefactors $25,000!!!

Ok, how bout this. If Delaware wins, I'll rip up my card and take the sticker off my rear windshield.

But, WHEN Furman wins, you must start a thread on this board, and post "The SEC is the most dominant conference ever, there is no debate." And you must post this line, AND ONLY THIS LINE, for 2 days following the game!

Deal?

[EvilVodka]

JMO, but I don't think harsher gun laws will be as effective as some might think, and the fact is, there's alot of Americans that flat out won't give up their guns

Better and stricter permitting, like Zoom says, might help...

IMO, there is a deeper issue here...why are these rage killings become more popular? I think its a psychological problem that our society has...the VT killer was very socially isolated. Not talking or having friends can screw people up, and despite all the technological connectivity, I think its easy for people to fall through the cracks in society, especially in pockets of culture that can become very homogenized

This problem isn't going to go away though, because I don't see the underlying themes in our society changing or improving...and of course, people aren't going to give up their guns

[Bucs90]

Alienation is one. Video games and internet have further isolated these freaks like Biffy and the Omaha clown.

Evil, you are right that gun laws just won't work. For one, people just aren't going to give them up. It's that simple, and no method of collecting them will ever work, despite Biffy thinking a dream world and a magic wand will appear to do it.

The one example I have posed that no gun-control supporter has yet to answer is this: If more laws is the answer, why is it that we have all the anti-narcotics laws in the books, yet drugs are easier to find on a street corner than Biffy's girlfriend? If one would go to the street corner of any inner city, what would be easiest to get: An illegal drug, a legal gun, or Biffy's girlfriend. In order it would be 1- Biffy's girlfriend, 2-Illegal drugs, and 3-A legal gun. There are laws making 1 and 2 illegal because of beastiality and anti-drug laws, but no universal gun law. Yet, a legal gun is harder to get than an illegal drug, and pound for pound the drugs are far more expensive. Gun control supporters can't seem to answer why anti-drug laws have resulted in more drugs and more availability, and the illegal drugs are easier to get than legal guns.

[Blue Hen]

What are all these civilized countries with only a fraction of gun homicides ( compared to the USA) doing ?...besides tougher penal systems. We need to do what they do about guns.....whatever it is.

[Bucs90]

Hen, it is tougher penalties and culture. Also, though it doesn't get much press, other nations don't have Freedom of Information Acts. Their stats are very far from honest. I'm sure they are lower than ours, but not at the rate they report. In the SC Police Academy, a chief from London was a guest speaker. He said this is a long time European tactic to keep riots from occurring- letting the citizens see "safer" stats than normal.

It's a complicated issue. But, IMO, when a thug knows a gun crime is gonna get him life, not 3-5 with parole in 2, he thinks twice about robbing the 7-11 store.