0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
The right to bear arms, an inalienable right, shall NOT BE INFRINGED.
It is OUR DUTY as American citizens to do away with a tyrannical government, as stated in the U.S. Constitution, the second most beautiful thing written next to the Word of God.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 20 Given: 20 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 20 Given: 20 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5 Given: 0 |
I'll try but it's hard, with Troll DNA, you know.
I admire your composure at least
Yes, people are people... but you're wrong hereThank you oh so very much for not using my whole quote, it's because of the lower population density that it's not as common. Per capitia it's probably quite close because people are people everywhere.
firstly, people can vary a lot. Some are like water, some are like heat (wise words of alphaville ). Also they vary a lot within certain situations.
This applies to animals as well. A famous zoologist writes:
you are right that it's not as common in rural areas because of density IMO...Under normal conditions, in their natural habitants, wild animals do not mutilate themselves, mastrubate, attack their offspring, develop stomach ulcers, become fetishists, suffer from obesity, form homosexual pair-bonds, or commit murder. Among human city-dwellers, needless to say, all of these things occur. Does this, then, reveal a basic difference between the human species and other animals? ... this is deceptive. Other animals do behave these ways under certain circumstances, namely when they are confined in the unnatural conditions of captivity
but not that 'per capita'. eg:
Before continuing, we should examine the latest evidence about urban crime. Although most often assumed to be the case, an important question is whether crime levels are higher in urban versus rural areas. According to crime statistics, community size does make a difference, as crime rates are higher in urban than in rural areas. Violent and property crime rates in our largest cities (Metropolitan Statistical Areas, or MSAs) are three to four times as high as the rates in rural communities (Barkan). These statistics hold for nearly all types of crime. For example, according to 1995 statistics from the Uniform Crime Reports, in U.S. metropolitan areas, homicide claims 11 victims per 100,000 inhabitants and more than 25 per 100,000 in some of the largest cities. In small cities and in rural counties, homicide claims only 5 victims per 100,000, and fewer than 2 per 100,000 in our most rural states (Federal Bureau of Investigation). This pattern also occurs for robbery and assault; they are much more common in large urban areas than elsewhere. Like violent crime, property crime is lowest in rural areas (Barkan). Further, this urban-rural difference has been found in Canada, England, Australia, and the Netherlands (Shover). These statistics present criminologists with the challenge of explaining why crime levels are much higher in urban than rural areas.(page)
hmm... homicide more than 1000% of the 'most rural' total in 'most crowded' urban areas, per capita. Oh well
and today for the first time in history, most people live in cities.
Why do I think it's less per capita because of density?
you can read an (irreverent) article on the 'monkeysphere' if you want, to sort of understand where i'm coming from.
In an agrarian culture most people will be connected by familial ties, or growing up together, will have smaller 'worlds' and know each other.
Of course they will still brutally murder each other sometimes, but not as much.
Now in a crowded city of 1,000,000... you've never met or known 99% of people you see everyday. They are not part of your 'in group' (or 'monkeysphere' as that guy called it informally). It's easy for a angry man to road rage at the lights and in a fit of passion shoot someone. and this really does happen, and it happens more often, per capita.
This is why I say it's not so bad in rural areas, like mid-west USA (or switzerland ), tighter knit communities. but in a modern urban sprawl with 'feral youth' and road ragin' balkanoids... uh-oh
The point is guns are much better at killing than tools. Actually they are too good.You're not giving it much of a chance though are you? You blithely claim that gun ownership implies that your going to be a victim of gun crime, and that you're not safe. If you don't want us to think that that is what you are saying, learn to construct your paragraphs better. Plus, isn't violent crime still just that? Violent crime? In the end, it doesn't really matter what was used to either hurt or kill you, it still did that job. You can kill someone with a screw driver, or an axe, what are we supposed to do, outlaw these tools? And I'll head off that argument of guns only being used to kill humans. Guns are able to be tools as well. You can save your life in the wilds with shooting an attacking animal, or use it as a signal for being in distress, and you are being rescued.
It's OK for a 'rational' person to take care of themselves in many ways, without increasing the number of weapons in the hands of the population and inevitably putting them into hands of people who will do harm.
If someone goes out to kill people in school, with a gun, or with a screwdriver, who do you think will do more hurt?
here some time ago, a psycho attempted to stab schoolchildren with a machette.
they were protected by a slim female nurse who stopped any deaths (although she got injured)
add guns and a different story will happen...
Sadly, not even half of a population is 'rational IMO'Guns in the hands of rational citizens just gives them the edge to fend off an attacker who already has the advantage from the aggression and adrenaline.
and we add: 'the attacker already has the advantage of aggression and adrenaline... and a gun too', suddenly not so good
this is like what bridie said (if the 'rational' people have guns, everyone else will too...).
wheras, here the 'rational' people don't have guns, but only very few criminals do. Less deaths. Better compromise
"I find your lack of faith disturbing"I find your lack of faith in the power of the common man disheartening.
sadly, such myths as 'power of the common man' or 'power of human reason' are often disheartening when the real truth is more known . I don't think the 'power of the common man' won your revolution, more like the 'mass of the common man' organised by the 'power of uncommon men' (as in: uncommonly talented) who were able to organise because of the given historical situation.
Last edited by Troll's Puzzle; 10-05-2009 at 08:18 PM.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5 Given: 0 |
They couldn't invade the mainland because this admirals fleet was destroyed by superious US navy and air-force. Also USA is much bigger than Japan, and had better tech.
But, if Japanese air force had been in position to do Tokoy, Hamburg, Dresedn, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, on LA, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Seattle, then those rifles behind blades of grass would not be so great
and, if they had been in position to land, reprisals for militia & partisan activity would be brutal. Especially from Japanese (who were most cruel by any standards). this is the reality of modern times...
besides, in such position, it's a good idea for govt. to distribute weapons to public, to be ready
in peacetime with no threat of invasion = serving little purpose, other than massive increase in homicide by firearms and school shootings
OK. I'll wait a few years
when nothing happens you can come back to this thread and tell me 'wait a few more years....etc'
Thumbs Up |
Received: 14 Given: 0 |
No opinion, but I get anxious with depressed people having guns at home...i feel for them.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 44,948 Given: 45,034 |
Precisely. Michael Moore said it, but just because he's a fat idiot, it doesn't mean it's untrue.
Fact: An increase of gun ownership among civilians will always result in a higher proportion of gun crime and deaths. This is really a pitiful and lamentable situation.
US School shootings"The level of gun ownership world-wide is directly related to murder and suicide rates and specifically to the level of death by gunfire."
International Correlation between gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide.' Professor Martin Killias, May 1993.
Help support Apricity by making a donation
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks