FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


America and guns,





Jack_Hammer
Quote:
Guns kill 10 children every day in America


There are lots and lots of otehr awful facts about America and guns, and the awful resluts, like a child is more likely to die from a gunshot than natural causes, or the most common way for a person to commit suicide in america is with a gun. You can easly buy guns in america with no fuss, and there are little to no laws on the production of them.
Sentenza
I think this is a serious problem, I mean, there are lots of countries where its not allowed and it just takes down the chance of relying to them.
Devil
in india we are not even allowed to carry Red chilli powder or a knife Razz

ok as a teenager we used to go out in the night and have fun and if they cops caught us , we used to put the chilli powder in thier eyes and run , Laughing
Vrythramax
It's not as easy as you might think to buy a gun in the US. Some states it is very easy, but in my state for example it is very difficult indeed to purchase or own a gun. This state will only issue a gun permit for hunting or target practice, if you even mention that it is for home, personal, or business protection you are denied the permit.

The individule states make thier own gun laws and some are extremely tough with thier laws, but on the other hand some states, mostly on the west coast, all that is required is a 3-10 day waiting period and not have a criminal history.

It is sad however that you are right, a child is more likly to die from gunshot than natural causes. Banning guns isn't the answer either, we have in our constitution the right to keep and bear arms.

I have said this before: If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.
Jack_Hammer
In England we are not allowed guns (Which I think is right) and very strict laws on handling of guns and gun permits. Also I am in the Army I have had lots of practice with Rifles LSW and MG's and I have seen people not using them correctly and could still of easly of shot someone and it have only been luck that they hadn't shot anyone., but in america people who do not even know how to use a rifle / firearm can easy purchase one. They take little care of them or how to put them away from children. It's a scary thought that a child could easly get hold of a handgun and live rounds.
iridios
Jack_Hammer wrote:
Quote:
Guns kill 10 children every day in America


There are lots and lots of other awful facts about America and guns, and the awful resluts, like a child is more likely to die from a gunshot than natural causes, or the most common way for a person to commit suicide in america is with a gun. You can easly buy guns in america with no fuss, and there are little to no laws on the production of them.


Lets start with the stat you quoted. That's quite misleading.

How is that number broken out? What percentage of those deaths are accidental, deliberate murders, suicides, and justified.

Yes justified. When a cop shoots a person in the line of duty (in defense of self or others) he may not be able to easily determine if that person is 17 (child) or 18 (adult). Do 17 yr olds killed in this manner count in that statistic?

Suicides. Guns are not the cause of suicide and most people considering suicide will attempt it whether a gun is available or not. Will a gun make it more likely? I don't know, especially not from that statistic.

Murders. Many child murders (especially of those truly young and innocent) are planned out. Will an absence of guns make this number go down? Probably but not likely in a significant way.

So what percentage is left?

When guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. This Pandoras box is already open and what we need is not another attempt to shove all the guns back in. What we need is more safety training and technology. More penalties for those who are negligent. And more incentives to those who behave in a safe manner.
Sappho
Its simple just look at the numbers of deaths caused by guns in US and other countries. But yet Americans dont get it and they need their "safety" even if its the other way around. But whatever let em kill each other, why should we care.
smalls
iridios,
Nice points. I get tired of people throwing around false or misleading numbers (not just about guns). Where is crime the highest in the US? Detroit, New York, L.A., Baltimore......all very liberal cities, all with very strict gun control legislation. Prohibition of any kind (guns, drugs, alcohol), only creates black markets and makes items more difficult to control. Do you really think gang members go to the Wal Mart and legally purchase a gun? Making guns illegal will not stop criminals from owning them or using them. I will never own a gun. I just don't like them. But I will certainly not tell someone else that they have no right to hunt, or to protect his or her family.
riv_
JackHammer wrote:
In England we are not allowed guns (Which I think is right) and very strict laws on handling of guns and gun permits. Also I am in the Army I have had lots of practice with Rifles LSW and MG's and I have seen people not using them correctly and could still of easly of shot someone and it have only been luck that they hadn't shot anyone., but in america people who do not even know how to use a rifle / firearm can easy purchase one. They take little care of them or how to put them away from children. It's a scary thought that a child could easly get hold of a handgun and live rounds.

I think this is an excellent point! I think it's important that everyone acknowledges that carrying a gun is a privilege, and needs to be licensed accordingly. We have to acquire a license to drive a car or operate heavy machinery, because of the risk to the public if we do it irresponsibly or without proper knowledge. Why should guns be any different?
If people aren't willing to learn how to use them properly, they probably shouldn't have guns (or cars, or forklifts, etc...)
Jayfarer
There is a big gun problem in the United States, but outright banning them is not going to work. It's an idealistic proposal. Imagine a country where guns are banned. In that world, anyone who has a gun is probably on their way to commit a more serious crime anyway. They're not going to care about not being allowed to carry a gun - they're going to be robbing a bank or shooting a guy anyway.

There are other ways to curb gun violence. Education, for instance. Outright banning anything (Drugs, abortion, guns) rarely gets rid of it.
Soulfire
Outlawing it will only make it more appealing to some, and besides, it's not as easy as one would think to get a gun in most states. The tone of this post seems condescending towards Americans, as if we don't know how to operate guns. But that's only what I gathered.

All in all better/stricter laws could (and should) be in place, but outright banning them will not work. This isn't the UK.
coolclay
Wow sometimes I am really proud to be an American. I love guns, I am a gun addict. You can buy guns extremely easy, just about anywhere in America. Thats the way it should be. By banning guns only the criminals and the government will have guns, and I don't know about anyone else but I don't trust either of them. Our entire country was founded by guns. Imagine trying to revolt against England without guns. Hunting is the only source of meat for my family, we hardly eat any meat unless we kill it ourselves. It is healthier then any other farmed meat anywhere.

For all of those citizens of countries that have banned guns just wait until your country starts doing something you don't believe in, just wait until that day when someone else holds a gun to your head, and you have no protection, just wait for that day when a criminal breaks into your house and your family is in danger, then you'll realize what a gun is for.

When World War III comes around I know I'll be prepared, I've got so much ammunition, guns, black powder, fuses, explosives, bullet proof vests, and food stored away I could take on a small army. So for those that live in a country where you're not allowed to own such things, I have a few words for you GOD BLESS AMERICA.
Sappho
coolclay wrote:
For all of those citizens of countries that have banned guns just wait until your country starts doing something you don't believe in, just wait until that day when someone else holds a gun to your head, and you have no protection, just wait for that day when a criminal breaks into your house and your family is in danger, then you'll realize what a gun is for.


Do u know that there is less probability that u will get killed if u dont pull any resistance? And besides if u have gun pointed to ur head u r prolly dead anyway.

Guns are banned in my country and i dont feel insecure as much as u with ur guns. Isnt it strange? And let me say i live in kind of dangerous neighbourhood, gangs and such. I have a black belt in Taekwon-do but i think most of the time the less resistance the better. Gun wouldnt make me feel any more secure thats for sure.

coolclay wrote:
When World War III comes around I know I'll be prepared, I've got so much ammunition, guns, black powder, fuses, explosives, bullet proof vests, and food stored away I could take on a small army.


"I do not know with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones." -Albert Einstein
izcool
It's not much of a big issue in the US as you would think, if you were to compare it to the rest of the world.

My dad went on vacation the other year to Poland and went to a Flea Market and was interested in what one vendor had. He was offering him a machine gun with all of the clips for (what he would consider) really cheap. He said he should have bought it, but with the 9/11 incident, that would almost be impossible to import. Just think about it, in Poland, you could have capped everyone away with that thing.

- Mike.
Animal
izcool wrote:
He was offering him a machine gun with all of the clips for (what he would consider) really cheap. He said he should have bought it, but with the 9/11 incident, that would almost be impossible to import.


I think that the real issue is not gun ownership, but gun violence:


(Source: http://www.wfsa.net/adobe_documents/Cross_Sectional_Study.PDF)

According to this table, Poland has a low gun ownership and low gun violence. There are very few countries with high gun violence rates - USA, Brazil, South Africa etc. Nowhere except the USA has d rated gun ownership and d rated levels of homicide, yet several countries like Australia, Canada, Germany etc. all have d rated (high) gun ownership, but a and b rated (low) homicide levels.

You have to wonder why, and I genuinely believe it is a culture problem. Canada has a very similar number of guns-per-head as America, yet its rates of gun related deaths per head are tiny. In American culture, the gun is glorified, even fasionable. It is because of this that there is such a high level of gun-related death.
Ultima1080
If you disarm your population, you are simply making them more suseptable to acts of violence, terrorism or even more defenseless in a case of a hostile invasion. Guns should be offered only to people that are proven to be competent with the weapon. I can guarantee that 50%+ of gun related deaths/injuries would be eliminated if idiots didn't touch guns. What kind of test would solve this? Hell if I know. You guys can come up with that one.
Vrythramax
coolclay wrote:

When World War III comes around I know I'll be prepared, I've got so much ammunition, guns, black powder, fuses, explosives, bullet proof vests, and food stored away I could take on a small army. So for those that live in a country where you're not allowed to own such things, I have a few words for you GOD BLESS AMERICA.


Maybe you need to chill a little dude. I don't know who said it but the quote went something like this:

"The world will not go out with a bang, but with a whimper"

Life is to short to prepare for something that may never happen, enjoy life a little man Smile

BTW....I Love America too, but I don't need a gun to prove it.
mschnell
Ultima1080 wrote:
If you disarm your population, you are simply making them more suseptable to acts of violence, terrorism or even more defenseless in a case of a hostile invasion.


I'm pretty sure that terrorists aren't going to try a "hostile invasion" of the United States. You aren't going to need to pick up your guns until aliens invade. We most likely aren't going to form a millitia any time soon.
seanooi
my friend was just caught the other day with a consealed gun in his car.

He is license to own a gun but not placing it under a jacket. Razz
ultraman
I love how these people from other countries are saying how bad my country is and how easy it to buy guns . I wonder how many of them have even been to the USA. To say somethings like its a fashion to have a gun?? Maybe in a movie or is that where you get your info ?

I for one am with coolclay . I love guns but, I haven't had to use one for anything other than hunting. I hope to never have to use one for self defense either. But , I can say I don't trust the autorities to come rushing to the rescue if I call to say someone is breaking in my house. I am sure it easier for them to put me in a hurse than, to risk their necks.



Quote:
Do u know that there is less probability that u will get killed if u dont pull any resistance? And besides if u have gun pointed to ur head u r prolly dead anyway.


Well these 2 sentences really contradict each other. Less probable that you want get killed if you don't resist ??? , then you say"If you have a gun pointed to your head you probably dead anyway?



Quote:
coolclay wrote:
When World War III comes around I know I'll be prepared, I've got so much ammunition, guns, black powder, fuses, explosives, bullet proof vests, and food stored away I could take on a small army.



Quote:
sappho wrote:
Guns are banned in my country and i dont feel insecure as much as u with ur guns. Isnt it strange?


Doesn't sound like he is insecure ..... at all!!

Maybe the reason for yall's government to take your guns is because they didn't trust you people with them. By all means our government doesn't trust us with them and are trying to find a way to ban them everyday . But I am pretty sure the day that happens there could be a revolt .

I don't know this subject always gets me worked up. When other people from different countries say stuff about it doesn't bother me as much as, my own countrymen agreeing with them!

Ok well that was fun and maybe I can apply for a site now!! Cheers .
kolinraff
The bottom line is: Guns are just making issues worse, theyre killing people. I believe guns should be banned all over the world! It will make the world a better place to live! Cool
windval
it is terrible

is it real???

i live in hong kong

so we do not have hun everywhere

i wonder that there are lots of crimes in America
Vrythramax
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, I know it sounds corny but it's true. I could beat someone to death with a hammer....should we outlaw hammers too?? How about kitchen knives next? Guns are not the real problem, it's an idiot with a gun that's the problem.

Let's just outlaw idiocy instead Very Happy
Reaper
coolclay wrote:
Wow sometimes I am really proud to be an American. I love guns, I am a gun addict. You can buy guns extremely easy, just about anywhere in America. Thats the way it should be. By banning guns only the criminals and the government will have guns, and I don't know about anyone else but I don't trust either of them. Our entire country was founded by guns. Imagine trying to revolt against England without guns. Hunting is the only source of meat for my family, we hardly eat any meat unless we kill it ourselves. It is healthier then any other farmed meat anywhere.

For all of those citizens of countries that have banned guns just wait until your country starts doing something you don't believe in, just wait until that day when someone else holds a gun to your head, and you have no protection, just wait for that day when a criminal breaks into your house and your family is in danger, then you'll realize what a gun is for.

When World War III comes around I know I'll be prepared, I've got so much ammunition, guns, black powder, fuses, explosives, bullet proof vests, and food stored away I could take on a small army. So for those that live in a country where you're not allowed to own such things, I have a few words for you GOD BLESS AMERICA.


No dont ban guns..... just get rid of all the gun crazy lovers, as seen above. Problem solved, Also if you really have a problem with guns then just look at it like population control, not like our cultures going to drop dead just because a few people out of say 7 million drop dead...... Also in case you didn't know our world is allready over populated in the first place so a few people dropping dead here and there would actually help our enviroment.
Also if you have a problem with that population control thing I mentioned please dont use religion as an defence because that would just be condradicting your self seeing most all religions have a bloody background.
Animal
Ultima1080 wrote:
If you disarm your population, you are simply making them more suseptable to acts of violence, terrorism or even more defenseless in a case of a hostile invasion.

But in the USA, everyone is fed on fear. Everyone is told that there is a massive threat from Terrorism, North Korea are going to attack... I also seem to remember being told that Saddam Hussein could launch chemical weapons that could harm Americans and their allies.

Watch the news in America... how many stories are about violent robberies, assaults, shootings etc. and how many stories are about news that actually matters???

The threat to your personal safety is blown out of all proportion by the media, and I believe it was the "massive threat from terrorism" that got George Bush back into the White House for his second term.

Vrythramax wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, I know it sounds corny but it's true. I could beat someone to death with a hammer....should we outlaw hammers too?? How about kitchen knives next?

To an extent, I agree with you. But viciously attacking someone at close range with a hammer or knife takes a very messed-up person. When it comes down to it, you need to be inhuman to set out to murder someone in this manner. Guns make killing a lot less "real" to the murderer - they pull a trigger, hear a bang and see someone at a distance falling to the ground. They then run away.

Guns make killing more convenient - your brain isn't able to properly process that you have violently killed someone.

At least... that's my opinion.
kve
i once did a presentation on Guns once and got led to terible facts about guns and america , i got loads of info in just a few minutes and got to know things what i didnt even want to know, i got scared because i was only a 10 year old at the time. i hate the USA sometimes
Sappho
ultraman wrote:
Quote:
sappho wrote:
Guns are banned in my country and i dont feel insecure as much as u with ur guns. Isnt it strange?


Doesn't sound like he is insecure ..... at all!!


Yes thats why he needs so many guns prolly Smile) ROFL

Vrythramax wrote:
Guns are not the real problem, it's an idiot with a gun that's the problem.


So and what does this say about Americans? Smile
dexterius
I never was in America. But i used to watch news, so can make image. I saw some film about it. I dont remember it's name but it was really interesting. There were some disturbing fact, about the number of murders in America, so ti looks very dangerous.
Jack_Hammer
Vrythramax wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, I know it sounds corny but it's true. I could beat someone to death with a hammer....should we outlaw hammers too?? How about kitchen knives next? Guns are not the real problem, it's an idiot with a gun that's the problem.

Let's just outlaw idiocy instead Very Happy


Erm... you do realise your talking about america right?, outlawing idiocy would basically leave no population left. The whole thing with the knifes and hammers they are less dangerous, and what about accidental deaths with guns?, much higher then with knifes or hammers, even by dropping a gun if can fire and kill someone. Very few people use guns with the right precortion or care in america.
Animal
Sappho wrote:
So and what does this say about Americans? Smile


Jack_Hammer wrote:
Erm... you do realise your talking about america right?, outlawing idiocy would basically leave no population left.


Looks like there are a few flame-bait comments going around here! Laughing


Not many Americans would agree, but the problem does not stem simply from levels of gun ownership - there is something about the American attitude to guns and gun violence that is causing the problem. It's not the guns, it's the Americans.*

* - This wasn't intended as flame bait by the way!
mschnell
I've only known three people that have been shot. Two are dead now. Each shooting was accidental. You can blame it on "idiots with the guns" but if there are so many idiots with guns, why not ban them?
izcool
In the United States, it is the 2nd of our 10 Amendments to the right to bear arms. (See this page - http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/cons.bill.html) We can do this with any kind of a weapon, say a gun, a knife, a stun gun, mace, pepperspray, anything it seems like. Many people are practicing this right by owning a gun at their house for protection. People are getting way out of proportion out of the usage of guns by using them to commit suicide, murder (when not in danger), or for other such reasons. I hope I will live a very long time, and I do not want my life ended very shortly over such of a reason like that. When you really get down to it, any kind of a weapon is really horrible to have around, but that's the kind of a world that we live in today. This is not the 18th century when those Amendments were ratified, and it is illegal for the government to infringe on those rights that are issued to us.

In my last comment, I was just trying to get through to the fact that it's not typical for any old person to carry around a machine gun with them and wanting to sell it. It's almost impossible to do that here in America if you don't do it right.

- Mike.
Reaper
Animal wrote:
Ultima1080 wrote:
If you disarm your population, you are simply making them more suseptable to acts of violence, terrorism or even more defenseless in a case of a hostile invasion.

But in the USA, everyone is fed on fear. Everyone is told that there is a massive threat from Terrorism, North Korea are going to attack... I also seem to remember being told that Saddam Hussein could launch chemical weapons that could harm Americans and their allies.

Watch the news in America... how many stories are about violent robberies, assaults, shootings etc. and how many stories are about news that actually matters???

The threat to your personal safety is blown out of all proportion by the media, and I believe it was the "massive threat from terrorism" that got George Bush back into the White House for his second term.

Vrythramax wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, I know it sounds corny but it's true. I could beat someone to death with a hammer....should we outlaw hammers too?? How about kitchen knives next?

To an extent, I agree with you. But viciously attacking someone at close range with a hammer or knife takes a very messed-up person. When it comes down to it, you need to be inhuman to set out to murder someone in this manner. Guns make killing a lot less "real" to the murderer - they pull a trigger, hear a bang and see someone at a distance falling to the ground. They then run away.

Guns make killing more convenient - your brain isn't able to properly process that you have violently killed someone.

At least... that's my opinion.

News thats important? different news is important depending on YOUR point of view, so canned beans can be considered important news. your also not used to our news because your goverment most likely prohibits such things. Some people might consider a murderer on the loose important, others might not. I personally would not care about a murderer roaming around. Besides the point most people know that you should not believe everything the news tells you, and that goes for any news including yours because they will bend and twist facts so it better suits them.
And by your definitions you gave 9/11 should not have been on our news then?? because it showed violence? oh cry me a river but if your soft stomache cant handle it just stand up, walk to the tv and do one of two things, Change the channel or shut it off and your problems solved.
also everyone is fed off fear?? funny I'm not fed off fear, in fact a little 1 year old girl usually is not fed off fear either. Also in irony you cant actually eat fear (also I know you didn't mean it literally)
also in answer to your question theres actually only about 2 occasionally 3 storys that involve terrorism or shootings. Unless you watch the only news channel that purpously airs that stuff when ever they get the chance.
I allmost forgot bush didn't get into office because of the threat of terrorism alone, people just didn't want a president who would argue one side then completly switch sides and argue for that side (also i'm talking about kerry) So if you had to choose between an idiot who switched sides all the time and an idiot thats aggressivly anti terrorist which would you have choosen?
Ashis Kumar
Reaper wrote:
Animal wrote:
Ultima1080 wrote:
If you disarm your population, you are simply making them more suseptable to acts of violence, terrorism or even more defenseless in a case of a hostile invasion.

But in the USA, everyone is fed on fear. Everyone is told that there is a massive threat from Terrorism, North Korea are going to attack... I also seem to remember being told that Saddam Hussein could launch chemical weapons that could harm Americans and their allies.

Watch the news in America... how many stories are about violent robberies, assaults, shootings etc. and how many stories are about news that actually matters???

The threat to your personal safety is blown out of all proportion by the media, and I believe it was the "massive threat from terrorism" that got George Bush back into the White House for his second term.

Vrythramax wrote:
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, I know it sounds corny but it's true. I could beat someone to death with a hammer....should we outlaw hammers too?? How about kitchen knives next?

To an extent, I agree with you. But viciously attacking someone at close range with a hammer or knife takes a very messed-up person. When it comes down to it, you need to be inhuman to set out to murder someone in this manner. Guns make killing a lot less "real" to the murderer - they pull a trigger, hear a bang and see someone at a distance falling to the ground. They then run away.

Guns make killing more convenient - your brain isn't able to properly process that you have violently killed someone.

At least... that's my opinion.

News thats important? different news is important depending on YOUR point of view, so canned beans can be considered important news. your also not used to our news because your goverment most likely prohibits such things. Some people might consider a murderer on the loose important, others might not. I personally would not care about a murderer roaming around. Besides the point most people know that you should not believe everything the news tells you, and that goes for any news including yours because they will bend and twist facts so it better suits them.
And by your definitions you gave 9/11 should not have been on our news then?? because it showed violence? oh cry me a river but if your soft stomache cant handle it just stand up, walk to the tv and do one of two things, Change the channel or shut it off and your problems solved.
also everyone is fed off fear?? funny I'm not fed off fear, in fact a little 1 year old girl usually is not fed off fear either. Also in irony you cant actually eat fear (also I know you didn't mean it literally)
also in answer to your question theres actually only about 2 occasionally 3 storys that involve terrorism or shootings. Unless you watch the only news channel that purpously airs that stuff when ever they get the chance.
I allmost forgot bush didn't get into office because of the threat of terrorism alone, people just didn't want a president who would argue one side then completly switch sides and argue for that side (also i'm talking about kerry) So if you had to choose between an idiot who switched sides all the time and an idiot thats aggressivly anti terrorist which would you have choosen?


I would stick with the consistent one!
Ashis Kumar
Review May Shift Terror Policies

The Bush administration has launched a high-level internal review of its efforts to battle international terrorism, aimed at moving away from a policy that has stressed efforts to capture and kill al Qaeda leaders since Sept. 11, 2001, and toward what a senior official called a broader "strategy against violent extremism."

The shift is meant to recognize the transformation of al Qaeda over the past three years into a far more amorphous, diffuse and difficult-to-target organization than the group that struck the United States in 2001. But critics say the policy review comes only after months of delay and lost opportunities while the administration left key counterterrorism jobs unfilled and argued internally over how best to confront the rapid spread of the pro-al Qaeda global Islamic jihad.

President Bush's top adviser on terrorism, Frances Fragos Townsend, said in an interview that the review is needed to take into account the "ripple effect" from years of operations targeting al Qaeda leaders such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, arrested for planning the Sept. 11 attacks, and his recently detained deputy. "Naturally, the enemy has adapted," she said. "As you capture a Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an Abu Faraj al-Libbi raises up. Nature abhors a vacuum."

The review marks the first ambitious effort since the immediate aftermath of the 2001 attacks to take stock of what the administration has called the "global war on terrorism" -- or GWOT -- but is now considering changing to recognize the evolution of its fight. "What we really want now is a strategic approach to defeat violent extremism," said a senior administration official who described the review on the condition of anonymity because it is not finished. "GWOT is catchy, but there may be a better way to describe it, and those are things that ought to be incumbent on us to look at."

In many ways, this is the culmination of a heated debate that has been taking place inside and outside the government about how to target not only the remnants of al Qaeda but also broader support in the Muslim world for radical Islam. Administration officials refused to describe in detail what new policies are under consideration, and several sources familiar with the discussions said some issues remain sticking points, such as how central the ongoing war in Iraq is to the anti-terrorist effort, and how to accommodate State Department desires to normalize a foreign policy that has stressed terrorism to the exclusion of other priorities in recent years.

"There's been a perception, a sense of drift in overall terrorism policy. People have not figured out what we do next, so we just continue to pick 'em off one at a time," said Roger W. Cressey, who served as a counterterrorism official at the National Security Council under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. "We haven't gone to a new level to figure out how things have changed since 9/11."

"No question this is the next stage, the phase two," another senior counterterrorism official said. "We are coming to the point of decisions."

Much of the discussion has focused on how to deal with the rise of a new generation of terrorists, schooled in Iraq over the past couple years. Top government officials are increasingly turning their attention to anticipate what one called "the bleed out" of hundreds or thousands of Iraq-trained jihadists back to their home countries throughout the Middle East and Western Europe. "It's a new piece of a new equation," a former senior Bush administration official said. "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how are you going to locate them in Istanbul or London?"

Another key aspect is likely to be the addition of public diplomacy efforts aimed at winning over Arab public sentiment, and State Department official Paul Simons said at a congressional hearing earlier this month that the "internal deliberative process" was broadly conceived to encompass everything from further crackdowns on terrorist financing networks to policies aimed at curbing the teaching of holy war against the West and other "tools with respect to the global war on terrorism."

The policy review was initiated this spring by the NSC and is being led by Townsend, several administration officials said. They confirmed that the review may lead to a new national security presidential directive, superseding the October 2001 document signed by Bush that pledged the "elimination of terrorism as a threat to our way of life."

The review may have been slowed somewhat by the fact that many of the key counterterrorism jobs in the administration have been empty for months, including the top post at the State Department for combating terrorism, vacant since November, and the directorship of the new National Counterterrorism Center. "We're five months into the next term, and still a number of spots have yet to be filled," Cressey said. "You end up losing valuable time."

The counterterrorism center was created nearly a year ago by Bush to serve as the main clearinghouse for terrorism-related intelligence but is not yet fully operational, and has been run by an acting director and caught up in the broader wave of bureaucratic reorganization that resulted in the creation of the new directorate of national intelligence, whose fiefdom the center will join.

Cont....

Wha I want to suggest is that the strategy has failed & they are focusing upon new things....But the fear will continue!
Animal
Ashis Kumar wrote:
...Massive Copy&Paste job...

Wha I want to suggest is that the strategy has failed & they are focusing upon new things....But the fear will continue!


When you're copying and pasting stuff from external websites, you need to use the "Quote" tags:
Code:
[quote]source[/quote]

Otherwise you get a load of points for nothing, and you get some pretty cheezed off moderators. Just a suggestion - use the "Edit" box and add the tags.
Blaster
Quote:
Guns kill 10 children every day in America



The correct number is really 12 I had to read somethin on this and this is what i came up with. We had a debt about it in english. It was a pretty interestign descission.
mschnell
Reaper wrote:

And by your definitions you gave 9/11 should not have been on our news then?? because it showed violence? oh cry me a river but if your soft stomache cant handle it just stand up, walk to the tv and do one of two things, Change the channel or shut it off and your problems solved.
also everyone is fed off fear?? funny I'm not fed off fear, in fact a little 1 year old girl usually is not fed off fear either. Also in irony you cant actually eat fear (also I know you didn't mean it literally)
also in answer to your question theres actually only about 2 occasionally 3 storys that involve terrorism or shootings. Unless you watch the only news channel that purpously airs that stuff when ever they get the chance.
I allmost forgot bush didn't get into office because of the threat of terrorism alone, people just didn't want a president who would argue one side then completly switch sides and argue for that side (also i'm talking about kerry) So if you had to choose between an idiot who switched sides all the time and an idiot thats aggressivly anti terrorist which would you have choosen?


First, Geoge Bush would not be president had the majority won. Second, news organizations are businesses and that being said, they do what they can to make money. Voilence sells, even if it isn't important news. Also, the word fed does not have one definition. Look it up.
ocalhoun
Jack_Hammer wrote:
or the most common way for a person to commit suicide in america is with a gun.

There you go... get rid of the guns and no more suicides... Right?
Reaper
mschnell wrote:

First, Geoge Bush would not be president had the majority won. Second, news organizations are businesses and that being said, they do what they can to make money. Voilence sells, even if it isn't important news. Also, the word fed does not have one definition. Look it up.

First off republicans must have been the majority because he DID win, that second statement is just repeating somthing in my post but twisting it a little then removing it from the quote you made, and the third one I realize that the word fed has more then one definition. In fact if you want to get technecal a lot of words have more then one definition but whats your point? I was talking about what it usually means.
now for a little on topic discussion.

ocalhoun wrote:
Jack_Hammer wrote:

or the most common way for a person to commit suicide in america is with a gun.
There you go... get rid of the guns and no more suicides... Right?

Its funny how many people seem to think that if you get rid of guns suicide will just go away. But this is not true, in fact some states have tried to legalize whats called assistant suicide in which someone can actually help you commit suicide with out getting in trouble for killing someone. Theres that and suicide has been around long before guns were created.
mschnell
George Bush didn't have the highest percent of the of the popular vote in the 2000 election. Gore did. Bush won because of the electoral college rules. Also, I believe you just restated what ocalhoun implied. So were you trying to agree with him or disagree with him?
coolclay
Speaking of guns in America check out this movie. I have to go to Oklahoma some time to have some real fun.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5854686068870249151
ultraman
Quote:
There are so many interesting ways to die in America, that we felt it was just wrong to limit it to the most frequent causes, which are all boring diseases and infections and stuff. (Except in Alaska, where suicide generally makes it into the top ten.) You want to hear about the terrible calamities, the tragic consequences of an error in judgment or a general lack of coordination. Do we ever disappoint?
10. Machinery
Deaths per year: 350

9. Medical & Surgical Complications and Misadventures
Deaths per year: 500

8. Poisoning by gases
Deaths per year: 700

7. Firearms
Deaths per year: 1,500


6. Suffocation
Deaths per year: 3,300

5. Fires and burns
Deaths per year: 3,700

4. Drowning
Deaths per year: 4,000

3. Poisoning by solids and liquids
Deaths per year: 8,600

2. Falls
Deaths per year: 14,900

1. Motor vehicle crashes
Deaths per year: 43,200



Well it looks as though we need to ban cars in America if we are goin go to ban guns for all the MANY MANY deaths it as caused .

I have lost friends from driving accidents but, no one has ever been shot that I know.

Speaking about watching all the news from foreign countries to say its a problem with guns over here. I told my friend from Honduras the other day that I would never go to a soccer(fubol) game in a Latin country because I was afraid someone would bomb the crowd .... since thats the only thing I see about their countries on the news.

Its stupid to think if you take guns out you will get rid of suicides! Take alook at Japan on that chart some guy posted. Look at suicide D. Guns have been banned over there. You even have to have a license to own a samurai sword there since the end of WW2. So I don't wanna know what sick ways they get there suicide done.

Quote:
In pre-Nazi Germany, the good, law-abiding citizens dozed while government passed laws (all purported to be for the public good) that paved the way for tyranny to flourish

You know the result of the Jews getting their guns banned.

On another note, what would you countries with banned guns do if say a
"barbarian" country like ours with our guns decide we want to expand? If your army/government fails in defence. What would yall do , ban together an try to kick us with your red belt in tae kwan do? You would probably just "try not to resist so you wouldn't die" and we could rule you..... just something to think about , not anything meant by this.

Even if we banned guns and "made the world a better place" what about all these countries or say these countries governments with their nuclear warheads that can wipe out nations?

If you really want a solution, make a time machine !
horseatingweeds
coolclay wrote:
Speaking of guns in America check out this movie. I have to go to Oklahoma some time to have some real fun.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5854686068870249151


That was awsome!

I lived in OK for a few years when I was a kid. There was a place everyone called the "graval pot". That place reminds me of it. The gravel pit was were everyone would take their guns to shoot. I swear, I remember trying to find something there without a bullet hole in it and I never could.

It was fun. Lots of cans and bottles meet their end at the gravel pit.
Reaper
mschnell wrote:
George Bush didn't have the highest percent of the of the popular vote in the 2000 election. Gore did. Bush won because of the electoral college rules. Also, I believe you just restated what ocalhoun implied. So were you trying to agree with him or disagree with him?

Yes well luckly we dont elect people based on how popular they are, The popular vote is just like being popular in a school, sure people may say they like you and all that stuff but its what they say BEHIND your back that actually counts. And the fact still remains that he won the election both times so he must have been doing somthing right those other guys were doing wrong.
And yes thats the point to restate a point to make it stronger, but i did add a few modifications to it. Also you realise that ocalhoun was being sarcastic right? he was saying that even if you removed guns suicide rates probably would not drop very much maby 1% but thats about it. so yes I support what he said.
Jack_Hammer
izcool wrote:
In the United States, it is the 2nd of our 10 Amendments to the right to bear arms. (See this page - http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/cons.bill.html) We can do this with any kind of a weapon, say a gun, a knife, a stun gun, mace, pepperspray, anything it seems like. Many people are practicing this right by owning a gun at their house for protection. People are getting way out of proportion out of the usage of guns by using them to commit suicide, murder (when not in danger), or for other such reasons. I hope I will live a very long time, and I do not want my life ended very shortly over such of a reason like that. When you really get down to it, any kind of a weapon is really horrible to have around, but that's the kind of a world that we live in today. This is not the 18th century when those Amendments were ratified, and it is illegal for the government to infringe on those rights that are issued to us.

In my last comment, I was just trying to get through to the fact that it's not typical for any old person to carry around a machine gun with them and wanting to sell it. It's almost impossible to do that here in America if you don't do it right.

- Mike.


In the 2n amendment it sys that you do have the right to bare arms (To control the population) as a form of armed malitia, not for personal protection. Plus that thing was made a ages ago, times change.
ccarter24
The second ammendment of our constitution is the main issue. If anyone tried to change that in any way, it would never happen. There would be such a stink put up about it that whoever proposed changing the 2nd ammendment would be ridiculed about it forever. It is outdated, and probably does need to be changed, but it's never going to happen. I don't think we really need a militia nowdays when we have so many in the armed forces. But Jimbob in Kentucky is never going to give up his squirrel shootin' rifles.

Quote:
Erm... you do realise your talking about america right?, outlawing idiocy would basically leave no population left.


By the way, you suck Jack_Hammer.
mschnell
Reaper wrote:

Yes well luckly we dont elect people based on how popular they are, The popular vote is just like being popular in a school, sure people may say they like you and all that stuff but its what they say BEHIND your back that actually counts. And the fact still remains that he won the election both times so he must have been doing somthing right those other guys were doing wrong.
And yes thats the point to restate a point to make it stronger, but i did add a few modifications to it. Also you realise that ocalhoun was being sarcastic right? he was saying that even if you removed guns suicide rates probably would not drop very much maby 1% but thats about it. so yes I support what he said.


Uhh...yes, I was making sure you caught that because your reply acted like perhaps you didn't. Um, your thing about popular vote makes no sense--at all. I hope you're joking or something.
bassgs_17
You'll never take me alive! Me gusta los firearms...
-Aquastrike
shut up
iridios wrote:
Jack_Hammer wrote:
Quote:
Guns kill 10 children every day in America


There are lots and lots of other awful facts about America and guns, and the awful resluts, like a child is more likely to die from a gunshot than natural causes, or the most common way for a person to commit suicide in america is with a gun. You can easly buy guns in america with no fuss, and there are little to no laws on the production of them.


Lets start with the stat you quoted. That's quite misleading.

How is that number broken out? What percentage of those deaths are accidental, deliberate murders, suicides, and justified.

Yes justified. When a cop shoots a person in the line of duty (in defense of self or others) he may not be able to easily determine if that person is 17 (child) or 18 (adult). Do 17 yr olds killed in this manner count in that statistic?

Suicides. Guns are not the cause of suicide and most people considering suicide will attempt it whether a gun is available or not. Will a gun make it more likely? I don't know, especially not from that statistic.

Murders. Many child murders (especially of those truly young and innocent) are planned out. Will an absence of guns make this number go down? Probably but not likely in a significant way.

So what percentage is left?

When guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. This Pandoras box is already open and what we need is not another attempt to shove all the guns back in. What we need is more safety training and technology. More penalties for those who are negligent. And more incentives to those who behave in a safe manner.

I think you are right Iridios. If I didn't own a gun I would probably not be talking to you. I knew someone that commited suicide with a car because he didn't have a gun. Look I'm a gun owner and I almost got robbed, one thing kept me from being robbed. Any guesses what tha might be? A gun, my Smith and Wesson .380. The jackass busted my window right behind me, I grabbed my gun and pointed it at him, then right next to his foot then fired. He cried like a baby Boo hoo! while running like a bat out of hell. if i didn't have a gun, He had a machete. Also we are on the verge of a war in this country. If we don't have guns, it won't be war it will be an execution, of us.
Nisk
Crying or Very sad Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about it, Why?
What are u gonna do give up buying guns or said that it is bad? U aere gonna get shot in the end of the day! So if i had the chance to buy a gun i'd do it, for my protection and for those whom i love or anyone innocent for that matter Evil or Very Mad
shut up
Does anyone here know of Michal Moore that fat ultra leftist that made a wannabe documentary? He was for gun control but his bodyguard (any ideas why he would need one?) got arrested in new york for illegal possesion of a handgun! Hmmm, i think that these guncontro freaks are hypocrites, why? My neighbor is an ultra leftist (against the war, for the muslims, for gun control, etc) who says that people shouldn't own guns, but he has 2 guns.Think Hypocrite!
Sappho
shut up wrote:
Does anyone here know of Michal Moore that fat ultra leftist that made a wannabe documentary?


You the one that won the Golden Globe? The one that won the Oscar? The one that is known even among the masses (kind of an ultra achievement for a documentary director Smile )?

Nah i dont know about him. Smile)

shut up wrote:
Hmmm, i think that these guncontro freaks are hypocrites, why? My neighbor is an ultra leftist (against the war, for the muslims, for gun control, etc) who says that people shouldn't own guns, but he has 2 guns. Hypocrite!


You know hypocrites are everywhere that has less to nothing to do with gun control Smile
mschnell
Sappho wrote:

You know hypocrites are everywhere that has less to nothing to do with gun control Smile



I couldn't agree more--catch anyone at the wrong time and they're a hypocrite. Get called a hypocrite and at least you know you're in good company with the rest of the world. Perhaps the one that says they're not a hypocrite is the most hypocritical of all.
Jack_Hammer
Okay how many cops kill kids?, because thats justified, I'm talking about children not teenagers. There are thousands of deaths every year in america due to lack of gun control, and yet in the UK there are around 30 deaths a year which are gun realted (It's the same kind of stats in many european countries). Yet in america (Although you have what?, five times the population of the UK) you have a massive amount of deaths (a lot being caused by accident which is damn hard to do if the only way you can get a gun is by applying or being in the Armed forces / police), cuts out all those little children that accidently find a gun and don't know what it is, load it and shoot themselves, or that little child playing indians and cowboys with his dads pistol?
ultraman
Quote:
Jack_Hammer:
little children that accidently find a gun and don't know what it is, load it and shoot themselves

Well then you have to admit we have pretty smart kids here. To find some object that they don't know what it is and decide ,hey , this must be a gun. I am going to find some bullets for it , shift a bullet in it , pull it off safety , find key , remove trigger lock(if one) , then point at self or others and pull trigger . hahaha.

I think the world today is filled with abunch of sissies! Blaming all their problems on other things. Like back in the day , they wanted to blame violent video games on peoples actions. Then action movies. Now, I guess they just go straight to the guns. Thats like blaming a cliff for people walking off the edge of it. Now you would have to flatten the whole world!

Anyway check out this video. Some forces beating up 12 year olds in iraqi from throwing rocks at them. Probably young high school drop outs doing this. I don't know.


http://www.youtube.com/?v=LpDBK6qBtZU Very Happy
benwhite
People are still blaming videogames and TV for violence in children.

It's just a matter of people being carless. You wouldn't leave a knife around a toddler, you'd be a afraid the kid would put it in his mouth. You don't leave guns lying around not because kids are stupid but because it's a dumb risk to take. It's not hard to invest in a safe to hide your firearms where you child won't steal to kill himself and all his friends.

A few years back there was a sixth grade girl who shot herself in a school bathroom at my old high school. You're telling me that there is something the slightest bit wrong with that picture?
rwtthai
Like a lot of issues, gun control has a lot of misused statistics. I forget which statistician said it but "statistics lie".

Most crimes committed with guns are committe with "illegally acquired and used guns". That is a fact usually missing when the "need" for new gun laws are trotted out.

Children (under 1Cool, criminals, insane persons are are prohibited from buying firearms. However in the US (and every other country I've been to in the work - a lot of them) illegal guns are available at a price. Example Washington DC and NY City are two prime examples. Guns are banned except in very exception circumstances and require a license. Yet they have the highest gun crime rates in the nation.

Another interesting fact, states that have implemented "licensed" concealed carry permits (yeah you have to take training, a test and register to get it - again no minors or criminals need apply), have seen a dramatic drop in viloent crimes. Just cooincidence of course.

Has anyone mentioned Switzerland where every military age male is in the Army and REQUIRED to keep their guns (assault rifles and pistols) in their home? Nope no one likes to talk about how low their crime rate is even though practically every Swiss male between the age of 18 and 55 has a gun.

If you are depending on the news broadcasts for a view of any nation you need to get away from the boob tube and travel. Hollywood and the news have one thing in common - they tell stories to make money. The more gruesome and horrible the stories the more viewers and the more money. Truth has little to do with it.

A few years ago I took a Thai friend with me to the US. He asked me where are the Police? According to the Hollywood version of the US we should be seeing cops on every corner and SWAT teams in daily combat. Hardly saw a cop (we were in LA too). By contrast here in Thailand they are on every street corner and every little village.
Jack_Hammer
ultraman wrote:
Quote:
Jack_Hammer:
little children that accidently find a gun and don't know what it is, load it and shoot themselves

Well then you have to admit we have pretty smart kids here. To find some object that they don't know what it is and decide ,hey , this must be a gun. I am going to find some bullets for it , shift a bullet in it , pull it off safety , find key , remove trigger lock(if one) , then point at self or others and pull trigger . hahaha.


Point is, children might not know it's a real gun, and some people keep the guns and bullets together, and also it's not always forced by law in most states in america to actually apply satefys on guns (so just to put bullets in and to shoot you could kill someone), so with a child finding a handgun (Knowing what a pistol is) and wants to play cops and robbers (or other childinsh game with his brother for ex.) loads it and shoots him?
ultraman
Jack_Hammer , I just read it that you said didn't know what that object was . You didn't specify on didn't know if it was real or fake .

And the sixth grade kid shooting themselves. What is the deal with these kids shooting themselves and others? Really something else is wrong besides guns, I swear . When I was 5years old I had a pellet gun. I used to go with my my neighbor who was 7 with his pellet gun to shoot birds. I never once thought of shooting him or myself for that matter. Why are these stupid kids do this crap now? I mean back in the day when cowboys and indians used to roam . When they turned into a teenagers they should have been pretty skilled at hunting. So why are the kids today retarded?

Also people don't have to acted like buttholes all the time too. A good way to get shot is to just lose your temper at someone, curse at them , honk (car) , flip them off! Be considerate and easy going . You never know when you are going to treat someone bad that just might not be right in the head! I just say this cause of how I seen people treat others like dirt for no reason.
Jack_Hammer
Yes the fact I stated firstly was true.

(You see fact means something is true, intresting stuff huh?)
ultraman
I guess you are correct, except that you worded the first post to confuse the hell out of any normal english speaker. Very Happy
Of course , after writing a few sentences peoples train of thought might forget a word or two! Smile
Jack_Hammer
ultraman wrote:
I guess you are correct, except that you worded the first post to confuse the hell out of any normal english speaker. Very Happy
Of course , after writing a few sentences peoples train of thought might forget a word or two! Smile


My first post to me is fairly well written, commas in the right places, full stops and everything.
Wink
Code of Ruin
I think the right to bear arms and arm bears is roughly the same. It is needless to carry around guns. It doesn't scare people from commiting crimes, obviously.
Jack_Hammer
Code of Ruin wrote:
I think the right to bear arms and arm bears is roughly the same. It is needless to carry around guns. It doesn't scare people from commiting crimes, obviously.


Wasn't that off Robin Williams stand-up?
ultraman
Quote:
My first post to me is fairly well written, commas in the right places, full stops and everything.

I was just talking about that one part about the kids didn't know what it was. It was very specific. But good job on the grammar , haha. Very Happy

Anyhow, I think it is impossible, no , it is impossible to ban guns successfully. If they did the crooks would have them. Also the government couldn't get rid of their guns because, they would be afraid of getting overthrown. More points, for more days to be hosted , even though I barely have a site. haha.
Cheers
Moore
Well, if you ask me, I think people should not be able to have a gun unless you are a police officer, but personally, I always wanted to hold 3 guns: Walther PPK, Walther P99, and the gun from Tomb Raider.
Weeminator
I stand by the United States Constitution on this topic. GUNS 4 ALL! (except my sister and her friends...)
psycosquirrel
I'm getting a rifle when I turn 18 for protection. I will have it locked in a safe, where guns should be unless you need them. Unfortunately, people are often irresponsible with guns... That is why they have bad names... In some places though, it is necessary to have one to either avoid conflict or just protect yourself. "Noone will f*** with someone with a gun."
activate
In Australia it is very difficult to own a gun, they won't let you own a gun unless your hunting with a 303. or if your a cop. Let alone its expensive for the gun + the licence
thiamshui
they shouldn't allow guns to be legal in US.. nobody has the right over others' lives..
ultraman
well we shouldn't have cops , courts , and presidents. Smile
Jack_Hammer
ultraman wrote:
well we shouldn't have cops , courts , and presidents. Smile


I agree with the whole presidents thing, we have prime ministers or PMs and MPs ministers of parliment.

What about if the price of a bullet was like 5000, would you be careful about whether you shot comeone then?, or if you do get a gun you should have it licenced (in the US, I know you have to have one licenced to own one pretty much everywhere else) and have your DNA registerd and your fingerprints taken. Also your gun modified so that it idents every bullet you fire to your gun?
JessieF
Soulfire wrote:
Outlawing it will only make it more appealing to some, and besides, it's not as easy as one would think to get a gun in most states. The tone of this post seems condescending towards Americans, as if we don't know how to operate guns. But that's only what I gathered.

All in all better/stricter laws could (and should) be in place, but outright banning them will not work. This isn't the UK.



To me, they seem this way towards Americans, also. Those who have never been in America before shouldn't judge Americans (enless they've had some good education on how things really go around here).
idrather_not
[quote="Jack_Hammer"]
Quote:
Guns kill 10 children every day in America


OMG! Shut the ****** up. Do you know how many time a day i have to hear this. Oprah Winfrey, said "Guns Kill People". That pisses me off. Let me tell you something america, Guns don't kill people, the crazy ass people your creating in this country do! You could take a gun and put it in any persons hand, its that persons choice to fire it or not. Why do you think they arrest the guy and not the gun he used to kill the victim. Guns are just a tool, a dangerous tool but a tool none the less. In all honesty, a human could be killed by anything, for example, i could take a Q-tip (harmless yes) and shove it so far in a persons ear that it pops there eardrum and they internally bleed until they die. Does that give people the right to say "Q-tips kill 10 children every day in america" I say that if you can blame Guns for killing people than i can blame my pencil for spelling mistakes. There are some other issues i would like to address in that quote but i'll stop protesting.
bdoneck
The fact that the guns exist is not the reason that people are killed.

Even if guns didn't exist there will always be people murdered, it wont change. What I'm saying is: Guns don't kill people; people kill people. It matters not what they use to do it, people will always kill people.

So the fact that it's easy to get guns in America does play a partial role in lots of deaths of those that are killed with them accidently. The accidental deaths are due to lack of training and common sense, but the murders wouldn't change with changes of law.
ultraman
Quote:
What about if the price of a bullet was like 5000, would you be careful about whether you shot comeone then?, or if you do get a gun you should have it licenced (in the US, I know you have to have one licenced to own one pretty much everywhere else) and have your DNA registerd and your fingerprints taken. Also your gun modified so that it idents every bullet you fire to your gun?

If I were a criminal .. well if I were to want to plug someone and guns had all of the above. I would just use a knife or bow and arrow.

Anyway president "adolf" is another story haha.
Jack_Hammer
There would be a lot less accidental deaths, don't you guys get it?
ultraman
yeh accidental. but then some other statistic would take its place. Then we would have to do something about that one. Still though, cars would be a heck of alot better to take away than guns.
benwhite
Sure murder rates will change. It's a lot more challenging to kill someone with a knife than with a bullet. Not only do you have to be within arm's reach, but often knife wounds aren't nearly as fatal. Guns allow for impulse killing much more so than handheld items because often a single shot is fatal, as with a knife, one person often has to continually assault someone.

Murderous intent may not decrease, but the cases of actual murder would surely go down. People kill people, but anything that faciliates it is not free from blame.
yatria
The splintered American opinions about handguns are reflected in a patchwork of state and local laws that confuse gun owners, aggravate law enforcement officials and draw headlines when tragedy strikes.

A wonan's hand bag by Feminine Protection enables quick concealment for a handgun. The pistol is a 9mm Smith & Wesson and the "model" is Bill Rice of Don's Guns of San Antonio.
What's legal in one state could land you in hot water in the state next door. Overriding federal gun laws touch on only a few areas, while state and local laws have daily impact on gun ownership and use.

In New York state, for example, permits from local courts are required for all handgun purchases. Local sheriffs and police departments then have up to six months to process applications. Once sales are complete, all handguns must be registered. Permits to carry concealed handguns are relatively hard to come by, issued only at the discretion of local law enforcement officials.

But in neighboring Pennsylvania, handgun permits are not required and firearms are not registered. Local law enforcement officials have just 48 hours to complete a background check of prospective gun purchasers. Anyone who meets a few basic requirements can get a permit to carry a concealed handgun.

Neither state recognizes the other's permit.
alkady
Thats awful, But what can be really done. The Government is no better by owning millions of guns, Which I find set a bad example.
coolclay
Quote:
in the US, I know you have to have one licenced to own one pretty much everywhere else) and have your DNA registerd and your fingerprints taken. Also your gun modified so that it idents every bullet you fire to your gun?


I don't know where you get your information from but you are very very wrong. This may be the case in some liberal states, but not the majority of them. And I never heard of
Quote:
gun modified so that it idents every bullet you fire to your gun?
If your talking about bullet fingerprinting that has nothing to do with getting your gun modified, it is just because of the fact that all barrels have nicks and scratches in their rifling pattern, which makes them different then all other barrels.
S3nd K3ys
Sappho wrote:
let em kill each other, why should we care.


Quoted for posterity. Wink

I love guns. Statistics can be bent to look any way you want. If you want the truth, look at all the stats from pro and con about the subject.

Here's my family shooting.

Son, Aged two. Note the gun control, using both hands.



And my beautiful wife that shoots that AR almost as accurate with iron sights as I do with a scope.



And here's me (on the left with a glock in one hand and a colt .45 in the other), and my brother (on the right with my Springfield M1 .308 sniper rifle.)



Here's my nephew shooting the glock. Also very good form for a novice shooter. Wink



















And for those of you that have guns for security...













S3nd K3ys
Quote:

* New York has a population of 8 million, London 7 million
* London's crime rate is about 7 times that of New York
* Police budgets are comparable
* New York has 40% more cops on the beat

...

In 2002 a study found that 11 million crimes had been left out of British government figures, including hundreds of thousands of serious crimes involving woundings, robberies, assaults and even murders as well as thefts. Dr. David Green of the Civitas research institute said: "When you check the small print, it turns out the Home Office itself thinks that there were far more than the 13 million crimes discovered by the [official] British Crime Survey, perhaps four times as many." Dr Green said the Office of National Statistics was subject to political interference and a genuinely independent statistical service was needed.


On a further note, keeping guns is a matter of safety. Let me explain...

Quote:
You can't be a survivalist if you live and work in the UK. Weapons are outlawed. Even PREPARING to defend yourself is outlawed. If for example, I suspect someone is going to break into my house, and I leave a jar of the extremely hot Szechuan Chili Oil by my bedside, knowing to myself that no attacker could function with a faceful of that stuff, then it's me that goes to jail.
reddishblue
coolclay wrote:
Quote:
in the US, I know you have to have one licenced to own one pretty much everywhere else) and have your DNA registerd and your fingerprints taken. Also your gun modified so that it idents every bullet you fire to your gun?


I don't know where you get your information from but you are very very wrong. This may be the case in some liberal states, but not the majority of them. And I never heard of
Quote:
gun modified so that it idents every bullet you fire to your gun?
If your talking about bullet fingerprinting that has nothing to do with getting your gun modified, it is just because of the fact that all barrels have nicks and scratches in their rifling pattern, which makes them different then all other barrels.

Coolclay you loon did you go back to the first page to find this Confused
Exander
Jack_Hammer:

Quote:
Yet in america (Although you have what?, five times the population of the UK) you have a massive amount of deaths


Double take. So what your saying is with 3 people you might have one death and with 12 people you might have 4 deaths?

Either way it's the same percentage. Brilliant comment.

If your condescending tone didn't shine through on every post, your opinions might matter.

I think this bears repeating:

Quote:
* New York has a population of 8 million, London 7 million
* London's crime rate is about 7 times that of New York
* Police budgets are comparable
* New York has 40% more cops on the beat


What's wrong with you Brits?
ClanClawdor
hey , america isnt too bad i have been there its alrite but flung with Very Happy crime
KernEnergie
That's just sad.
I mean, being so paranoid, yeah maybe someday, someone is going to break into your house and if you don't have a gun then he'll kill you and your family? Ok, but maybe this guy also has a gun.
I'm in France and you can't buy guns. Even for hunting it's really hard to own one. And I don't think that there's more murders than in USA. Of course you can play with statistics but the truth is that a gun is not a safety synonym, it's a danger for you and others.
S3nd K3ys
KernEnergie wrote:
That's just sad.

I'm in France



That explains it. Wink
Exander
ClanClawdor wrote:
hey , america isnt too bad i have been there its alrite but flung with Very Happy crime


That's a pretty broad statement. I've lived in New York City for 13 years, and I feel is very safe. In fact, it's safer than Sydney Australia.
a.Bird
Exander wrote:
ClanClawdor wrote:
hey , america isnt too bad i have been there its alrite but flung with Very Happy crime


That's a pretty broad statement. I've lived in New York City for 13 years, and I feel is very safe. In fact, it's safer than Sydney Australia.

Well that obviously depends on which borough you live in.

I think America is so saturated with cultural problems that to eliminate gun violence means eliminating so many other issues which would require a very drastic change in government policy, which in this country is extremely difficult. "If you're not partisan you're not American, damnit!" We all disagree on the details but we can't seem to all agree on a larger focus- less killing and more sharing makes the world go 'round.
HoboPelican
Exander wrote:
ClanClawdor wrote:
hey , america isnt too bad i have been there its alrite but flung with Very Happy crime


That's a pretty broad statement. I've lived in New York City for 13 years, and I feel is very safe. In fact, it's safer than Sydney Australia.


Really? Can you quote your source?
I found the following.
Sydney murders per 100,000 in 2005 was 2.1
Lawlink.nsw.gov

NYC murders Per 100,000 in 2005 was 18.9
Disastercenter.com


I know Im coming in a bit late here, but I noticed someone making a point about not being allowed to own guns in England. Ive heard that said before, but I always hear about hunting there, also. What is the reality?
Related topics
my favorite band
Bush Poll
Favorite Songs
America's Army
Weekend fun, (or) why I love America
what do u know about Egypt?
My list of musics
Huricane
If WWII had been an online Real Time Strategy Game
INCREDIBLE THINGS HAPPEN IN AMERICA... In a simple 20$ bill
Mexifornia - The Destruction of America
Google earth-- Big security Hole..White house hidden now
What's great about your country?
2 to 7 crimes stopped by guns for every crime using guns.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.