Dubstepforum.com

there are countries enough that have proven gun control lowers crimes with guns and more so, homicide with guns. There's no denying that. And all the rest is circumstantial.

However, as I said: that has little relevance to the context presented in this case: a lunatic can not, by any law or measurement, be prevented from murdering people (perhaps the amount of kills he could accomplish would have been lowe). Unless we go all minority report or something.

capo ultra wrote:

PsycoCarrot wrote: If there a ton of knife-related crimes in the UK

are you stating an opinion or posing a hypothetic situation?

ie which auxiliary verb are you missing from your sentence: is or was?

The correct verb would be "are". The "IF" in my sentence poses a hypothetical based on posts from this thread that insinuate a lot of knife-related crimes.

Sorry, that was a bad typo on my part.

hubb wrote:

There has to be some way to put victim and criminal on equal footing.

Yeah? how about the police. One of the main problem with guns in the US is this ridiculous adverse to authority.

I'm talking about equal footing at the time the crime was committed. I don't have a police officer walking behind me at all times, ready to defend me against criminals. Police are not crime prevention, their role comes after the crime has already been committed.

Say I'm walking somewhere with money, sensitive information (work laptop, for instance), and I get robbed, or assaulted, at knifepoint and without some form of self-defense. The odds come out in the criminals favor almost every time... 1 weapon vs 0 weapon = criminal win.

Carrying a form of self-defense will drastically increase the chances of me getting away unrobbed and unharmed. In the case of robbery, most criminals are using the weapon as a way to intimidate you into giving up your goods, without actually planning to use it. Now, that isn't to say that the robber will not use it if it comes down to brass tacks; but if you pulled out a goodly-sized knife of your own, and the robber's intimidation tactic is diminished, and the odds have now changed....1 weapon vs 1 weapon = 50% chance robber will win, and only if he wants to get into a knife-fight.

I'm willing to bet most people don't want to murder/assault someone, possibly get murdered or go to jail, for 100$ or a work laptop. Most robbers faced in this situation will back down. But if the victim is defenseless, the robber places himself at very little risk.

As for assault, murder, etc, I still believe it comes down to equalizing the victim with the criminal. The ability to fight back is extremely important for your survival in any life-threatening situation. Having a form of defense could be the difference between alive and dead.

I would like to see a study of this.

How many incidents of people, in self defence or coming to an aid with a firarm, kill an armed assailant (IE in this case the guy in the theatre) and so saved the day or prevented criminal x. from killing more people

VS.

The amount of children or teenagers or stupid people that harm or even kill themselves each year with a firearm (ie not suicide) .

I think those figures alone would be rather shocking.

How about whatever kind of movie you go to see, that shit happens to you there in the theater? People line up and pay good money to see hours of violence and death. Boo hoo if that shit happens to you in real life. What did you expect?

pkay wrote:

capo ultra wrote:

pkay wrote:more people are killed by vending machines than serial gunmen.

not that I dispute this but...

source?

Sorry read the quote wrong. It was in relation to school shootings. Its a bathroom fact book. The quote is " you are more likely to die in a school cafeteria or by a vending machine falling.on you than to be.the.victim.of a.school shooting"

Actually did some looking into this;

Official 2011 US statistics are approx. 13 people per annum killed by vending machines, usually as a result of them shaking said vending machine in an effort to receive free product(s) from within.

It's also worth noting (US stats again);

6000 deaths per year caused by texting whilst driving
600 deaths per year caused by autoerotic asphixiation
450 deaths per year caused by falling out of bed
34 deaths per year caused by dog attacks
30 deaths per year caused by ants
4 deaths per year caused by rollercoasters

It's just a bit funny as well, you're treated as a criminal before you even enter America, but you can buy a gun at wall mart and have a blast! But they did spend billions on security

+ Imagine that Americas enemys are now thinking alike well at least you have your gun for self defence!

@psycoCarrot


I disagree completely. The principle you are talking about will escalate any situation and I bet statistics will back it up.

well, what do you expect from a psycho who can't spell?

another problem with the idea that it's ok for the good guys to carry knives is that ppl don't come with helpful labels saying which are good guys and which are bad guys. shades of grey, innit.

if somebody who would never rob anybody carries a knife in case somebody tries to rob him, and then gets into an argument or fist fight, he may use it, if only to put the other guy off, and then it may escalate, etc.

also, if you promote the idea that it's OK to carry a knife in self-defense, then the bad guys will do it, too, probably more often than the good guys.

Carrying a knife for "self defence" or "protection" is an all round tnuc move unless you happen to live in the jungle.

Doesn't help that the prison sentences in this country for non fatal stabbings are pathetic, not much of a deterrent

^^ yep. And the fact that "Atttempted Murder" carries lower sentencing than "Murder" is a bit mental too... if you tried to kill someone and failed, you deserve a life-sentence AND a...



... from the judge.

if we legalized all drugs, that would free up lots of space in prisons for violent offenders.

http://www.naturalnews.com/036536_James ... _flag.html

lot of speculation to be taken with a pinch of salt too but some relevant info in there.

d-T-r wrote:http://www.naturalnews.com/036536_James ... _flag.html

lot of speculation to be taken with a pinch of salt too but some relevant info in there.

Maybe it was planned by the same Americans who demolished the twin towers, hmmm?

Interesting points re; the cost/availability of the gear used though. And yeah, if he'd wanted to go full Joker he wouldn't have told anyone about it.

wub wrote:

d-T-r wrote:http://www.naturalnews.com/036536_James ... _flag.html

lot of speculation to be taken with a pinch of salt too but some relevant info in there.

Maybe it was planned by the same Americans who demolished the twin towers, hmmm?

Interesting points re; the cost/availability of the gear used though. And yeah, if he'd wanted to go full Joker he wouldn't have told anyone about it.

The average American has $25000 in credit cards. At 24 I had a $10k limit

That point is retarded

Also...are they suggesting that Hitler staged the holocaust in order to bring in gun laws?

Hmm, that article manages the nasty trick of being utterly calm and logical about a shockingly terrible event. It reminds me a bit of the 7/7 'campaigners' who tried to convince a woman that was in one of the carriages that got hit that the bomb never went off and she "didn't exist".

I'd imagine the "he's a total nutbar" part of the affair probably explains any inconsistent behaviour. Studying medicine (a discipline aimed to help people) and then going on a shooting spree is pretty inconcistent in itself... mad people tend to be pretty inconsistent. That's pretty consistent.

I can't even see much to gain for anyone in faking a non-terrorist atrocity. I can see lots of ad revenue piling into that website.... there's a very impressive number of banners on that page!

yeah all valid points- lots unanswered for as usual on all accounts. havn't really decided on anything myself. Funny ol'world we live in.

That article is both amazing, and ridiculous, all at the same time.

Rational and predictable, a mass murderer craves none of these.things