Stop blaming IB for the limitations of O.R.R. What can the guy do when the darn search apparatus turns up a five year old article first.

_________________
"It's not exactly a rocket surgery." D.J.

Reason isn't obscure. It's about as popular as political magazines get, which I suppose to say, not very, at least compared to "People" or "Sports Illustrated". But still, like I said, it's the representative magazine of libertarianism the same way that the National Review is for conservatism or "The Nation" or "The New Republic" is for liberalism.

As for the fudging of official numbers, here's just one example: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/government-figures-missing-two-million-violent-crimes-454637.html (The independent is a left-leaning British newspaper)

or here's a personal example from British psychiatrist/author Theodore Dalrympe:

Hell, it took me three years to learn how to use the damn thing. The learning curve is steep, to say the least.

IB, what am I to make of the fact that in neither the article nor the personal example cited existed a clear discussion of gun related crime. I can make the assumption that guns may have been involved in some of the violent crimes that in reality increased according to the Independent piece, but it is still just that an assumption. An assumption that you are making to serve your point and still doesn't clearly address the issue of guns. (But one that still ignores the fact that injuries/murder by firearm are pretty damned difficult to fudge all the way off the stat sheets)

As to the Dalrympes, one case of punk kids burning a dumpster isn't exactly evidence of the end of civilization, nor an argument against more stringent gun legislation, now is it.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

Well what you have to understand is that, control is in the mind of the individual, and in order to serve the whole organization, or institution, or team, control is a vital part of an individual's performance.

What happens is, control is taken out of context to what the individual is striving for. In certain situations, such as if the short stop is playing too deep against a batter who knows how to spread the field and also find the gap, and hit grounders to where he may not be looking; well, then you have control issues on the part of the manager and what he has to control in the situation. Has he taken control out of the individual altogether? Well, what you have to realize is that the individual still has the ability to control his own destiny, whereas the manager is controlling the destiny of the entire team at the moment.

But where control gets into a gray area is--whose loss of control is to be blamed if that short stop doesn't make the play? Was it the manager's decision that allowed this to happen? These are questions hard to answer, especially since when I played we didn't have control issues unless the issue was that we had too much control. And that would mean we were too tight, which we weren't, unless tightness was in the context of how we executed in success and that of course we were most of the time.

But control can only be distributed so many ways, before you have to question where the control is coming from and who it's being delegated to before making judgments.

_________________
Second is better than first when speaking in terms of basemen, and more specifically, me.

There is no simple solution. I know that, but the fact Hnadgun shooting is a sport somewhere is one of the sacrifices the National Handgun League will need to live without.

yes, I know Chicago has no handguns, but plenty of over the border (Chciago Heights) have gun shops.

I am not taking away the rifles, as I said you can still defend your self from those damn Canandians and kill ducks.

Gotta start somwehere
1. Illegal to Manufactur in US and make sure canada and Mexico are on board.
2. Handgun Posession. 5 years Minimum.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

But your missing my point; crime doesn't become worse simply because it involved a gun. A murder is still a murder, a rape is still a rape, and a robbery is still a robbery. "Tough luck old boy about the whole store getting robbed, but at least they weren't carrying a gun." I would entirely expect gun crime to drop as some guns are removed from the margins; however, as the transaction costs of committing other types of crimes (namely, the chance of getting shot at) is removed, those crimes will increase, and if history is any guide, they will increase by more than the decrease in gun crime.

Anyway, my main point there was that the British crime statistics are really unreliable. I know the one piece is anecdotal, but the other gives a more firm example. And I do know from many foreign students I've met from Britain that the Dalrymple story isn't an isolated event.

The whole self defense benefit of guns is a little bit exaggerated in my opinion if the weapon is stored properly. If you have the thing in a vault with a combination lock and someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night while you're asleep, what are the chances that you're going to be able to get up, retrieve it, put the clip in and shoot the mofo?

_________________
"It's not exactly a rocket surgery." D.J.

In my effort to nitpick small parts of people's arguments in this thread, I must interject.

Irish Boy, I would argue that robbery with a gun is worse than other robbery simply due to the fact that it has a more negative and lasting impact on the victim. If some guy comes up to me and says "Give me your wallet" I lose my wallet. If some guy comes up to me and says "Give me your wallet" and sticks a gun in my face I lose my wallet and think that I'm going to die.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Knives can kill just as easily, and much more silently. And you know the old cliche about bringing a knife to a gunfight (coincidentally, stabbings is one of those skyrocketing categories.)

Besides the knife or bat none of that stuff is a robbery. I'm talking about being robbed at gunpoint. Of course he would have some type of weapon but I'd much rather have a knife pointed at me than a gun.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

We are talking about robbery not murder. It may end up turning into a murder but I feel I have a much better chance of surviving a robbery by knife than I do a robbery by gun. That is where I see the difference.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Didn't the article said "except for murder and rape?"

Seems like those are two kinda important ones.

Anyone for outlawing whips?

1. you're putting a lot of hard working American Skilled Workers out of a job. Not too cool.
2. Posession is not the problem, unlawful use is, and there are very strong laws already. No need for more. Enforce what we have.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

1. You aren't getting all Union on us? The only thing more un-American than anti-gun is anti-capitalism
2. Can we say that for Iran and nuclear arms too?

The guy at NIU didn't unlawfully use his weapons until he decided to go on a killing spree. No enforcement law will change that.

I'd like my chances against a psycho running around with a knife rather than a gun.

flame on...

_________________
This is my signature...

I think you guys are the greatest. Coast and TM bring such intelligence to all discussions. KS is the dilligent watchdog of the group. The Black Lodge offers insightfull perspectives that I would not normally be exposed to...what...this is the handGUN thread...ooops.

He unlawfully "used" them as soon as he stuck them in the guitar case and walked outside.

_________________
@audioidkid

It is the locus of change, my friend.

_________________

And what gun law would have prevented him from doing such?

_________________
This is my signature...

Concealed carry.

IL gun law:

in order to be in compliance with all statutes, all firearms be
transported:
1. Unloaded and,
2. Enclosed in a case, and
3. By persons who have a valid FOID card.
Unless specifically exempted from UUW, a person commits a Class 4 Felony if he or she violates the UUW law
in the Criminal Code (i.e., unlawfully carries on their person or illegally transports a firearm in a vehicle) AND
one or more of the following aggravating factors apply:
(1) The firearm possessed was uncased, loaded, and immediately accessible at the time of the offense;
(2) The firearm possessed was uncased, unloaded, and the ammunition for the weapon was immediately
accessible at the time of the offense;
(3) Does not have a valid FOID card;
(4) Was previously adjudicated of a felony as a juvenile;
(5) Was engaged in a misdemeanor violation of the Cannabis Control Act or the Controlled Substances Act;
(6) Is a member of a street gang;
(7) Has had an order of protection against them in the last two years;
( 8 ) Was engaged in the commission or attempted commission of a misdemeanor involving the use of violence
against another person or the property of another; or
(9) Is under 21 years of age and in possession of a handgun, unless the person is engaged in hunting activities
under the Wildlife Code.

_________________
Paws Up

So there should be a police car parked outside the home of every mentaly disturbed person who legally owns a handgun just to make sure they are not walking around with them?

_________________
This is my signature...

That's the point, for the most part the police can't stop crime, they can only catch someone afterwards. Banning guns will not eliminate guns just as banning certain drugs has not eliminated those.

_________________
Paws Up

yes!

_________________
@audioidkid

Congress just passed a bill which prohibits the sale of firearms to the mentally ill . . . which, according to Nas, means I can't buy one.

I am aware of that it would be nearly impossible at this point to completely do away with guns in the U.S. There are far too many out there.

I will never go along with the "if you can't beat 'em join 'em" way of thinking that a lot of people espouse to. If I view something as wrong, I believe some sort of change should be attempted to correct the problem regardless of the level of difficulty involved.

It just amazes me that after all of the senseless gun violence that occurs in this country, in many cases carried out by people who legally own guns, we some how think the answer is to arm everyone.

_________________
This is my signature...

I just hope they don't ban lances.

While I have no stats for this, I would bet that a great majority of gun violence is committed by people obtaining them illegally.

Then of course there is the case of mandatory gun ownership.



Gun Ownership Mandatory In Kennesaw, Georgia
Crime Rate Plummets

by Chuck Baldwin

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.

And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?

The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.

The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don't have a death wish.

There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired.

_________________
Paws Up