Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
I'm far from liberal in my stance upon crime, my opinion is to bring back the gallows for a vast majority of them, but i do not believe private gun ownership is something to be had in society, neither is the regular carrying of knives. The cold hard facts are, put simply, more people die from guns where they are allowed, then where they are not. More crimes are committed where guns are allowed, then where they are not.
|
I realize that cultures across the pond are different. I'm glad you advocate serious punishment for serious crimes, now if only your government could do the same you might realize that private gun ownership is not a bad thing. If more crimes are committed where guns are allowed, then why is vermont (a state where no license is required to carry open or concealed) one of the three safest states in the US?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
Getting knives off the street is an important step in crime prevention. Sure, criminals are always going to commit crime with knives, but the aim is to stop kids going around with knives because they think they will be 'hard', or they have some kind of protection.
|
getting knives off the street will not prevent crime, just like getting guns off the street did not prevent crime. If anything, your crime rate as a whole went up. Question, is it already illegal in England for juveniles to carry knives?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
You say locking people up when they commit a crime isn't the whole picture. One needs to stop them committing the crime in the first place. Your responding to the problem, not preventing it.
|
That is simply because human nature is reactive, not proactive. We are not in the age of the minority report, although some people would like to think so. Simply telling people 'crime is illegal' isn't going to stop criminal activity. The same goes for banning guns, it won't prevent crime. It only forces those intent on committing crimes to use an alternate tool.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
The point of the police is to defend the public. On the whole the police here do a reasonably good job, they fuck up a fair few times, but so does any force. The police arn't routinely armed over here, so their incidents of bad gun practice are limited (though not unheard of). I can't speak however for the american police...
|
by and large the police in america do a fair job also, however, we have our handful of screwups as well. What I fail to understand is how society as a whole tends to 'forgive' the entire police force for that handful of bad apples yet punishes an entire populace for one percent of it's criminals.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
Not everyone wants to defend themselves.
|
you're kidding, right? are there actually people in England that prefer being a victim instead of defending themselves?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
Is it reasonable to give an old lady a knife to prevent someone stealing her bag?
|
No, which is why the gun is a more appropriate tool. It levels the playing field and gives the little old lady the ability to defend herself against anyone of any size.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
How about a little kid in the playground so no-one will pick on him?
|
That would be called adult supervision.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
Maybe i should give a knife to my sister so that she can stab anyone who makes unwanted advances.
|
you'd rather her be raped and possibly murdered than for her to fight back and defend herself from harm?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
The line is very small, and very easy to cross between defending oneself, and plain old assault/murder. People would need a good legal grounding to stop themselves falling short of the law.
|
this goes without saying. If someone assaults you or intends to assault you, you have the natural human right to defend yourself.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
In theory, it may work, but in practice, no. Defending oneself against an armed criminal when your armed will just end in tears for a vast majority of people.
|
when it comes down to it, if i'm attacked, I would rather make it home to my family that night than leave them husbandless/fatherless. If I kill the attacker, is that MY fault? because he decided to deprive me of MY rights? I think not.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
Personally, i don't carry a knife, and i would like to see the standard robber around here try to get my wallet when i've just broken his shin/testicles with my steel toe caps. If he had a gun, then i might be more inclined to comply, but he would have to pull a pretty big knife to make me do the same. Thats just my opinion however.
|
And the little old lady/ladies that are walking home from the market? should they just let themselves be pummeled by a large assailant because they were foolish enough to expect to walk safely in their town?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevie667
As far as i can see, my opinion of your stance is that you appear to be the typical 'lets give everyone guns and let them sort out their own problems' yankee.
|
If that is how you choose to see it. Personally I prefer to see everyone able to provide for their own defense should someone outside of the law decide to infringe on their personal rights. That way, those that choose to be a criminal are literally taking their life in to their own hands.