Don't listen to him. Chris_Balsz is an ignorant son of a bitch! Yeah. That's right. You heard me.

We still derail trains with 2x4s now! It's CLASSIC! I don't know whether to put this in the positive column for gun control because it brings more attention to this good-times classic or the negative column because all the tools and posers will start doing it if guns are banned--only us kewl kids do it now.

Guns are a violent and very efficient form of weapon, and there is no doubt that the number of murders and highschool tragedies would be reduced if there had been less weapons available in the US, like there is in Europe. I dont think guns alone are responsible for the tripple murder rates in the US, the american culture and problems of their society has to take a lot of that blame aswell. But there is no doubt that firearms to a certain degree breeds violence, and it particularily breeds violence where one desperado can actually manage to kill 15 people in a few minutes.

> Listos wrote:

> > sKoE )= wrote:

> > A gun can only protect you if it's in your hand.

>>And what...a knife can magically stab people?

>A gun can only protect you if it's in your hand?

>I'm too lazy to read whoever said that but whoever said that must be either the stupidest, most idiotic person I've ever met or they are ridiculously naive.

>am I to assume that I have a gun in my hand, I'm robbing sKoE for all the money he's got (which is probably a dime and 2 pennies ) I'm protecting myself? X(

I challenge you to find the point where I say the ONLY reason to have a gun is for protection.  You can't because I didn't.

>Edit: Ok then, DPS said that, ARE YOU A FREAKING IDIOT!? X(

Not at all I'm clearly way over your head.

Joking aside you misunderstood the point I was making.  IF, note the if...NOTE IT, you have a gun for the purpose of protection it does you absolutely no good unless it is in your hand, guns can't aim and fire on their own.  Let's use your example of you robbing sKoe; if you have a gun pointed at sKoe and are robbing them even if sKoe has a gun what good is it?  It's highly unlikely that sKoe would be able to reach their gun and shoot you before you shot them.  So the gun is essentially nothing more than an ornament in that situation.  Now sKoe could give you all of their money and as you turn to run off shoot you in the back but that isn't protection anymore, the potential for physical harm is gone, it's just retribution.

Now I do acknowledge for the gun nuts out there that a person having a gun can serve as a deterrent to a potential criminal, but aside from that I don't see the effectiveness.

Jesus christ this is the dumbest nonsense I've seen. Don't you kids bicker enough at school? "Well if someone did this..." "Well if someone had this in their hand...."

Such pointless ignorant rambling. Nobody cares whether a gun is in someone's hand or not. That's the great thing about hands, you can pick things up whenever you feel like it. If someone has a firearm and gets shot trying to pull it out of his coat he got shot because he's a dumbass. The fact is firearms prevent crimes and protect people. Cry more. Quotes like: "but aside from that I don't see the effectiveness." Nobody cares what you see. If you had an education you would see statistics which support one claim and destroy yours. Your ignorance is not an argument.

I believe that would be called Irony ARFeh

They probably won't notice. Their violent crime rates have all spiked upward; it's more comforting to keep their heads in the sand and brag about their nations' superior civilized laws over the internet. They'd just be thankful the trains were not derailed with GUN violence!!

>> Canada has fewer murders/1000 people than the US, we also have a much lower crime rate in general, and stricter gun control.  Exactly what about that destroys the claim that gun control is effective.<<

Canada has a lower murder rate than the US. So what? Our concern is the effect of firearms on murder rate. The US has a higher murder rate for whatever number of reasons. Did Canada formerly have a higher murder rate than the US then its murder rate dropped as a consequence of gun control to below the US's murder rate? No. It didn't. You're comparing unrelated statistics and ignoring causality.

When you look at violent crime rates in countries before and after enacting strict gun control, such as AU and UK, you find they as much as more than double in some areas and increase consistantly. This statistic shows us something. Comparing the relatively high murder rate of the USA to a dirt farming village in South America or Africa does not.

"Our concern is the effect of firearms on murder rate"

ok here some stats then:

In 2004 there had been 16148 cases of murder in the United states.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

of which roughly 8.5k had been commited with a handgun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

so you can say that roughly 50% of all muders had been commited with a handgun.
well even more then 50% with a firearm.

In germany.. where guns are forbidden... there had been 792 cases of murder in 2004 of which 104 had been commited with a firearm.
thats 13.13%
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mord

In my oppinion that discussion allways comes up so the politicians and "experts" have something to discuss...
Since no one can really explain why people do amok runs they allways pick "killer games" to pretend they are doing something.

The fact that almost 100% of all the killers who went amok played such games.. comes from the fact that 80% of all boys in that age do play such games.
We could also say "breathing air" makes people to be killers because 100% of the amok runners had been breathing air.

I do not think that video games have a violating effect on "normal" kids.
People who went amok would have done without counterstrike too.

I also wonder why allways the games are doomed.. and never movies which very often are way more violent.

Gun control should be apart of the bigger picture, and not used to lower crime by itself.

Pitty American cities don't understand this...

sorry, i thought an educated person like you can see facts in statistics. after your second education you should be able to see statistics and filter the information from them.

lol @ Schniepel

Total Pwnage